# Breaking 8th ed



## Tim/Steve

WOW, am I dissapointed with 8th.... and it looked so very good for so long. There is just 1 rule in the book that Ive only just noticed, and which totally breaks the game; so much so that I think certain armies will be rubbished.

The rule is that steadfast is not removed by disruption.... or in plain language if the enemy gets into your flank they may remove your flank bonus but they never take your 'stubborn' for having more ranks then you do.
Earlier on I was playing against a unit of 50 lothian spearmen with caradryan and teclis in... that was bad enough, but finding out that my unit of 9 bulls in the flank might win once but cant posssible win the fight long enough to kill the enemy. It pretty much turned out that I needed every unit in my army to hit theat unit as 1 to have a chance of winning... and that wasnt going to happen.

The part where this breaks the game is rank spamming- I've already faced a unit with 13 ranks (goblins), but what happens if I put in a unit with 50 ranks onto the board..?
I play ogres so my thoughts went to gnoblar; a unit of 250 gnoblars would have 50 ranks and would be stuborn Ld9 with a reroll if I put a general and a BSB close by. I set them up sideways accross the board (a metre long unit) and the enemy is not going to get through them any time soon (1in36 chance of them breaking) and it only costs me 500pts. Thats 1/6th of my army at 3k and Ive just completely closed off 1 side of the board. Now Im not sure if skaven have a limit om the number of slaves they can take in a unit but for 1000pts they can completely block the board, 1 edge to the other with sideways slave units (or unit)... and sit behind with mortars, cannons and the like either firing indirectly over the slaves or just sit on hills and fire over normally, quite happy in the knowledge that almost nothing will ever do enough damage to the slaves to kill their way through them, and the chances of failing a Ld10 test with a re-roll is tiny (1in144- lose every round of combat in every game, even the first turn, and you should break once in every 12 games).


So any army that can do a gunline and access to 2-3pt models has an almost unbreakable unit to throw in the way of the enemy... but since thie book comes with access to alies potentially any army can do the same- I can just imagine 2000pts of empire gunline with a 1000pt gnoblar screen sitting accross the table from me... there would be very, very little many people could do against that.


So, for me it looks like either 7th edition or just avoiding certain armies/builds... Im thinking 7th.


----------



## Cheese meister

yes stubborn is harsh but if you want a broken rule then look at stone throwers


----------



## Tim/Steve

stonethrowers are down to S3(9), so its not too bad for most things, although they'll certainly mess up units with some lucky rolling, but massive units of disposable troops that are all but unbreakable could be so broken as to end the game... gunlines with screens could well become the normal sight at tournies, but people have to have morals so low, and wallets so large to manage to pull it off...


----------



## Khorothis

I didn't think of that. O_O *processing* Well, I could do pretty much the same with Marauders, then put some Hellcannons in the back and watch them die. Oh and go forward with the Marauders, who have MoT and Blasted Standard BSB, plus a Warshrine just in case the gods aren't watching.  Hmm... this looks like a problem...

I think GW will fix this pretty soon with a FAQ or something, like "the disruption resistance of Steadfast works as long as the flanking unit is Infantry" and it'd pretty much solve the whole issue (because lets face it, the principle of the rule makes sense, its the application thats fucked up). Either that, or any worthy tournament will put a cap on unit size, somewhere between 35 and 50 (I'm thinking of 40). Also, cleverly positioned impassable terrain in the deployment zone could screw up this idea because you simply can't put the unit on the table. And when you're playing a friendly game you could always tell the rule-abusing maggot to GTFO or something along that line.

I wouldn't worry too much if I were you, this is going to be settled in a few months at the very least. Until then you could always raise an eyebrow at units bigger than 40.


----------



## Captain Galus

Correct me if I'm wrong but a few of the new spells can break a unit and cause it to flee, making it just a huge pointsink taking up space on the table. Hit one big unit enough times with a spell like that and it's bound to fail at least once.


----------



## Cheese meister

no 1 is 100% sure on that point as it is just a blasse remark made in passing and possibly not meant 2 be that


----------



## Barnster

From what I've seen skaven are going to own this new ed, large units, check really good catapults, plagueclaw has big template and lack of save, check, great anti gunline options check, monstourous ogres check, monster, check. 

BTW There is no maximum unit size on any normal skaven infantry

VCs are worse hit, the only units that are core are skeles ghouls and zombies, and zombies are nigh on unplayable now other than cheap raising, ghouls are killed by increased missiles and no save so skeles are the only option, and they are crazy overpointed now that fear has been nerfed and units are "braver". The magic danger also affects them more than any other race. 

From what Ive seen I don't like this new edition much. I don't like the idea of regiments more than about 40 models, other than actual horde armies like skaven and goblins, as more than anything armies with point sinks can be really dull to play as/ play against


----------



## Tim/Steve

I quite like the fear rules- you arent going to autobreak anyone but it will help you to win fights (and lets face it how often did skellies/zombies manage to actually win a fight)... now you just have to wait around for teh enemy to fail fear and then you hit them on a 3+, and they hit you on a 4+/5+ (damn zombie WS2).

@Cheese Meister- disruption does not remove steadfast... thats pretty much word for word from the BRB, its certainly stated as clear as that.

Caps on units might be good, but I think it'll really affect the way some units work- better would be errata'ing it to be 'rank bounus' not ranks, so if you hit a unit of 50 ranks with a unit of 20 then they wont be stubborn anymore (both have rank bonus of 3), doesnt help my ogres much though).


----------



## Barnster

Skeles would often win if there was a vamp in the unit. Ogres are going to steam roller small units, but are going to get roadblocked by big tarpit units.

Large units of ogres will start appearing, more than 4~5 anyway. Scrap launchers are going to see more use though


----------



## Cheese meister

was talking about the stone throwers s9/3 remark as it's just talking about in general hence why it's possibly a typo


----------



## Katie Drake

Couldn't one just keep casting Pit of Shades on them or something? The large template can hit a silly number of models and even with a good Initiative value (by which I mean 4) you'll still kill 1/3rd of the models you touch. It's not all that hard to get a spell off at 17+ with some armies.


----------



## Cheese meister

you can cast it once a turn and i doubt people will let it go so unless it's irrisitable force your unnlikely 2 get it of and with the miscast table how it is i would accept it as a fair trade


----------



## Tim/Steve

Pit of shades isnt that good anymore- small template scattering 1D6 or large template scattering 2D6, so its easy to miss the target entirely. Purple sun is similar and nastier and other death spells make the whole unit take S/T tests and if failed get wounded on a 4+/2+ which could be nasty for massive units, but using half your power dice on a spell that is going to kill 1/3 of one of these massive units is pretty wasteful- if you kill 1/3 of my gnoblars each cast for 3 turns then I'll still have 74 left (14 ranks), which is still a mighty tarpit, and assumes I didnt even bother to try to dispel it.
This also requires you to have selected a lore that has one of these cover all spells- and choosing your lore is now done at army selection, not at teh start of the game... so if you arent tailoring your lists you'll have to live with your favorite lore.


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

Katie Drake said:


> Couldn't one just keep casting Pit of Shades on them or something? The large template can hit a silly number of models and even with a good Initiative value (by which I mean 4) you'll still kill 1/3rd of the models you touch. It's not all that hard to get a spell off at 17+ with some armies.


*Thread Advertisement:* http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=65541

Your basic lvl 4 wizard can cast it on:

*CVs _1D6 _2D6 __3D6 __4D6 _5D6 __6D6*
13+	00.0%	00.0%	25.9%	66.4%	90.2%	98.0%
MCs	00.0%	02.8%	07.4%	13.2%	19.6%	40.2%

(CVs: Cast Values. MCs: Miscast Percentages.)


----------



## Blue Liger

Tim Steve reading your first post it seems that for WE one of the few competitive builds just became broken being that Eternal Guard armies were based on blocks of 50-70 eternal guard who gain stubborn for having a noble/highborn in them!


----------



## boreas

I thought 8th ed relied a lot on objective-based missions. Wouldn't having huge blocks reduced your number of units and thus the number of objective you can take? Also, I thought pie-plates and templates might become more common, isn't it the case? Mind you, I'm just back to WFB after a 7 years 40k-only gaming. Also, I might be biased because I'm playing LM again and 2 units of 2-3 salamanders would just beg for my opponent to use huge blocks...

Phil


----------



## Tim/Steve

I haven't read the missions yet... will when I finally get my own BRB copy. But I did play an objective mission in a 7th ed tourny last weekend, the enemy had a skaven plague furnace unit that they just walked over the objective with, so to win (well, +500VPs) I was forced to destroy the entire unit. Big block units are inherantly defensive in nature (not saying all are, or that they cant attack...) so walking onto an objective and then just not dying is going to suit them beautifully.

Pie plates are not as easy to bring to the table as you might think- breath weapons are 1 use only and stonethrowers have had their strength reduced. Magical blasts are more common but then I think a lot of the bigger units may well have high magic resisitance (every point of MR now increases your ward saves against magic by +1). For LM its the old ranked units of skinks that will be their stubborn blocks of doom- sure they are a little more expensive then gnoblars, slaves or zombies but get a Ld9 general anywhere near them (and the inevitable BSB) and they'll be laughing with their 3D6, hell I can't even get LMs to fail at stubborn Ld6 for their stegs... let alone stubborn Ld8-9.


... just a thought- the only naturally stubborn unit in the ogre book is a maneater (and you really pay through the nose for that stubborn). For the price of a single stubborn ogre with equipment I could get a unit of gnoblars with 9 ranks which will be stubborn for what seems like an eternity (and if the general is close by they wont have a lower Ld).I dont know if this follows through to other books as well but maneaters are hugely expensive purely for their stubborn rule (almost double the cost of an irongut for +1A, +1S, ItP- which is a downside in a fear causer- and stubborn), or I can use a handful of points on a unit that is far far far harder to kill (3W at T4 5+AS or 45W at T3) and blocks a much greater amount of space.


----------



## neilbatte

I think that at the moment the main problem lies with the actual Ogre book rather than the rules.
Most armies have access to multiple things that can deal with horde units or can spam hordes themselves Unfortunately Ogres are the exception.
The gut magic is more about buffing ogres than dealing damage.
The only reliable template is the scraplauncher (And the thundermace)
There is no access to the more destructive spell lores unless you want to pay out for a wizards hat(I have and it's hilarious)
Ogre shooting relies on luck as it's either sharp stuff (low ST) or leadbelchers(more dangerous to the ogres)
Hopefully the new Ogre book which is long overdue will address and level the playing field a little.


----------



## Yilmar

In my opinion I would take those massive over the top sized units with a pinch of salt. Sure you can field one gigantic unit covering your deployment zone but with terrain getting more important in 8th edition they wont get anywhere. I even think I have read somewhere that games should be played with at least 5 (different?) pieces of terrain making it nigh impossable to move with a gigantic unit. Though this is advisable in private games, tournament games would definately abide by it. 

Have also seen an 8th edition game (right from the BRB) on VP's with a twist. A condition was that when either player had less then 5pts on the table the game would end. Points were given to units with a banner, a general and/or bsb. So one should at least field 3 units with a banner, a general and a bsb or 4 units with a banner and a general. Granted that anyone could still go for that one massive unit with 2 or 3 units at minimum strength but those smaller units will be easy pickings and therefore end the game real soon. You can also bet on it that tournaments will be focused on missions like that.

So I guess the steadfast rule can be taken advantage off but isnt all powerfull in straight up 8th edition games. But then again nothing is certain untill we hold the BRB right in our own hands and look it up. Also an errata or FAQ would deal with it if the problem would be that big.

:victory:


Ps. Any army can have a killer stubborn unit if a character has the crown of command, instant stubborn for all at only 35pts!


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord

Cover is different in 8th ed. Now it's just there to make the table look pretty.


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth

What is this steadfast rule???

Surely flank charging negates ranks, sorted? Unless they've killed that, in which case tactical Warhammer has died and I will set myself the personal task of crucifying the design team.

Anyone thought of giving a Dwarf a Wizard's hat? Or a Chaos Lord with the MoK and a Wizard's Hat? Tee hee. :grin:


----------



## Masked Jackal

Steadfast means if the enemy has more ranks than you, they're stubborn.


----------



## Tim/Steve

@Farseer Darvaleth- thats exactly why Im dissapointed with 8th... everything up until that point was groovy. Flank charges negates the rank bonus, not ranks... so charging the enemy flank is of little importance beond them not being able to get manay attacks on you... and if they are stubborn they'll almost certainly A- not break and B- reform to face the unit in the flank.

Cover is not a problem in 8th, you can march straight through it no trouble...
as for moving large block units- to put it bluntly you cant, I would be setting it up sideways accross the deployment zone (facing the board edge), so could move 1/2 movement sideways (up the board) a turn. But principally it was as a blocker that I thought people would abuse such units- either to completely block off the enemies advance on a gunline or to decline a flank to an enemy army as a more eliet armiy advances. A friend of mine likes to play a 30 man chaos warrior unit... its game over if I deploy my blocker in front of him, stopping access to any support units I have (eg if I had taken 3 scraplaunchers) since he wont ever be able to get through that unit- even killing 40 a turn he'll still never break them... and not many units can put out that many wounds.

Its not even like you have to use many of your points to do it... 1/6th of an army to simply deny 1/2 the enemy line of advance isnt much to pay (but the £/$ cost could well be extreme).


----------



## CursedUNTILLDEATH

This will surley be fixed.... other wise the skaven guys at my club are going to dominte forever...so many clan rats....so many ranks...(chills)


----------



## Masked Jackal

I'll just have to hope that liberal use of Black Horror and Soul Stealer will help. T.T


----------



## NagashKhemmler

Tim/Steve said:


> stonethrowers are down to S3(9), so its not too bad for most things, although they'll certainly mess up units with some lucky rolling, but massive units of disposable troops that are all but unbreakable could be so broken as to end the game... gunlines with screens could well become the normal sight at tournies, but people have to have morals so low, and wallets so large to manage to pull it off...


Hellcannons/Trebuchets will become royally broken with S5, wounding most models on 3's with a -2 save.

Spells that reduce leadership will become necessary against many of those big units, the lore of death allows spells that reduce LD by 3, combined with a doom totem and diabolic splendour you can panic them at -5 LD, suddenly a lot of points runs off of the table, taking a bunch of units with it.

Also, fitting such a big unit onto the table would be difficult in many instances.

It's also worth noting that in the side those spearmen won't get supporting attacks, so they will only get attacks from models in base contact.

10 attacks, 8 hits, 2 wounds (roughly)

Compared to: 18 attacks (on your end) 9 hits and about 4 kills. Then you get your stomp attacks which is 2 more kills for 6 per round (on average). If you get regen or similar it's looking more in your favour.

I don't disagree with you necessarily, just saying you do have a chance. The biggest issue in general is just that High Elves are broken when fighting ogres, but that was the same in 7th edition. Hell, high elves are broken in 8th edition worse than any other in melee, my chaos warriors are elite infantry, I have to weather ranged fire the whole way across the board and point for point I break even with the stupid spearmen which are STANDARD infantry.

I really like some aspects of 8th edition, but high elves have become more broken and annoying than ever before.


----------



## Cheese meister

not really and please the s9(3) stone thrower thing is just made in passing to put it in context they are just saying in general stonethrowers are s9 s3 and high elves are ok but chaos warriors will mince them to death


----------



## NagashKhemmler

This assumes the warriors get to the fight unmolested (aproximates)

Round 1 (remaining)
Elves: 35
Warriors: 18

Round 2 (remaining)
Warriors 16
Elves: 29

Round 3 (remaining)
Warriors: 14
Elves: 23

Round 4 (remaining)
Warriors: 12
Elves 17

With two turns to get there, the warriors are still locked in combat.

Warriors: 192
Elves: 153

That's assuming the warriors don't get shot AT ALL.

If we add in 3 volleys of bows (seaguard maybe?).
25 shots (long range) 12.5 hits = 1.5 killsx2 = 3 kills
Short Range: 2 kills
Total of 5 before combat. (just one unit of bows/seaguard...).

Suddenly the warriors will lose every combat. I'm sorry but the high elves really are punching above their weight, an expensive elite troop should be smashing them, not gaining marginal victories, you have to remember they need to weather a whole host of bowfire on the way into combat, if after that, magic and bolt throwers they even make it at all.

On stone throwers I can definately see how bad they will become, especially against T3 armies. You'll be looking at 7-8 casualties per template hit!


----------



## Cheese meister

sea gaur are 13pts each and you really would slap them around lets say he has 20 you get ther with 12 all attack slap oh look i win better hope your stubborn punny elf
and your calculation against shooting is presuming no armour save


----------



## Tim/Steve

HE are broken, as soon as you play a game against Teclis you'll see that. A block of 10 wide archers/LSG are bad enough but having a shadow/life teclis close by makes them unbeatable. A shadow Teclis can just use Occam's Mindrazor every magic phase with 6 dice.. at which time that unit of achers can now beat anything else in the game without trying (their S is equal to their Ld), or life means he can up them to T5, or T7 if he has the buff-all RIP spell up... and you just cannot stop Teclis from getting them up. I was fighting T7 DPs and LSGs the other day... I had no chance at all.


Unit of 30 warriors with halberds charges 40 HE archers with mindrazor (we'll ignore stand&shoot... pretty much because it would be the HEs charging- throw 6 dice at the spell Teclis has about a 1in10000 chance of failing).
Archers have ASF so go first, they fight in 3 ranks and hit on a 4+, wounding on a 2+, with no saves for the warriors... thats 13 dead warriors and then 15 dead archers. The archers are stubborn Ld10 (I assume Teclis is within 12"- I think the spell has a longer rrange then that though).
Second round... the archers are still S10, and stil have ASF. This time they only kill 10 warriors, only 6 warriors still live... and they kill 7 elves. WoC lose and have a -4Ld test to make, which if they pass leads to almost certain death next turn.

So warriors, one of the all time best combat units cant even take on HE's basic ranged core unit if Teclis is hiding somewhere on the board with the right lore (and if he has shadows then casting any spell allows him to jump around the board)... and Ive ignored the 90-120 shots that those archers should be firing at the warriors while they get accross the board and then charge (should be <8 dead WoC if they have shields)... but then lets face it; if you know you'll knobble the warriors in combat all those arrows will be shreading whole units of marauders instead.


But back to the topic- same unit of warriors charge the flank of a unit of slaves costing the same as the archers from above. Thats 220 slaves in 44 ranks. WoC kill 22 slaves, slaves kill 1 warriors in return. Slaves have 39 ranks remaining, WOc have 2... slaves are stubborn with general's Ld +3-4 (cant remember the rank bonus to skaven Ld). They should be Ld10 and if there if a BSB close (and lets face it, a basic skaven BSB is so cheap as to be almost free) they should pass... and then be locked in combat with the WoC for ever more (well, about 10 combat rounds I recon- so, the rest of the game). Just as an alternate, if you move the general away and only had Stubborn Ld5-6 on the slaves they would likely run away... giving huge amounts of hits to everyone close by (D3+rank S3 isnt it? ... for about 40 S3 hits on the WoC, killing quite a few and letting the skaven bring other weapons to bear).
The worst thing about all this is that the skaven can freely shoot into this combat, so could line the other side of the unit with globadiers and jezzails, which can kill all the warriors (after targetting anything the enemy have that can fly over or shoot/magic over the slaves- stay within a couple inches of the slaves and flyers cant even charge over).


----------



## Khorothis

I see your point mate and I wholly agree with you that Teclis and the Steadfast are broken beyond imagination. However, all Tournament organisers have to do is to cap unit sizes and disallow special characters and there you go, the game is fair again. Because aside from these two things everythings fine (if you don't have unreasonable expectations that is ).

Though in case these steps will not be taken then I'll just get the following in lets say 1500 pts:

Sorcerer Lord; MoT, lvl4, Infernal Puppet - 325

Exalted Hero; BSB, Blasted Standard, Shield, MoT - 190

49xWarriors; MoT, Shields, Full Command - 894

Warshrine; MoT - 150

Stubborn Warriors with a 3+ armour save and a 3+ ward save against ranged attacks. Plus your first turn Pandemonium and Teclis can go fuck himself, along with his archers. Next turn will be a Gateway on anything I don't like. Oh and theres the Warshrine, who can give all sorts of nasty things to that one huge unit. Maybe a mediocre +1T, maybe Fear or Terror, or in case I roll a double six they become Stubborn regardless of their numbers and they all get a 4+ ward save, which turns into a 3+ ward save, sponsored by Tzeentch. That means 2+ for ranged attacks. After armour saves have been thrown. 

I wouldn't like to have games like this because it would revolve around one dickish rule and a stupid special character. But I'm not worried too much, these will all be fixed in the near future. Unless GW wants the Elves to be the Fantasy SPESS MUHREENS of course.


----------



## Dave T Hobbit

Khorothis said:


> ...I'll just get the following in lets say 1500 pts:
> 
> Sorcerer Lord; MoT, lvl4, Infernal Puppet - 325
> 
> Exalted Hero; BSB, Blasted Standard, Shield, MoT - 190
> 
> 49xWarriors; MoT, Shields, Full Command - 894
> 
> Warshrine; MoT - 150


If I understand the rules correctly, you need another non-Hero/Lord unit to make it a legal army. Your point is taken however.


----------



## Settra

Tim/Steve said:


> HE are broken, as soon as you play a game against Teclis you'll see that. A block of 10 wide archers/LSG are bad enough but having a shadow/life teclis close by makes them unbeatable. A shadow Teclis can just use Occam's Mindrazor every magic phase with 6 dice.. at which time that unit of achers can now beat anything else in the game without trying (their S is equal to their Ld), or life means he can up them to T5, or T7 if he has the buff-all RIP spell up... and you just cannot stop Teclis from getting them up. I was fighting T7 DPs and LSGs the other day... I had no chance at all.
> 
> 
> Unit of 30 warriors with halberds charges 40 HE archers with mindrazor (we'll ignore stand&shoot... pretty much because it would be the HEs charging- throw 6 dice at the spell Teclis has about a 1in10000 chance of failing).
> Archers have ASF so go first, they fight in 3 ranks and hit on a 4+, wounding on a 2+, with no saves for the warriors... thats 13 dead warriors and then 15 dead archers. The archers are stubborn Ld10 (I assume Teclis is within 12"- I think the spell has a longer rrange then that though).
> Second round... the archers are still S10, and stil have ASF. This time they only kill 10 warriors, only 6 warriors still live... and they kill 7 elves. WoC lose and have a -4Ld test to make, which if they pass leads to almost certain death next turn.
> 
> So warriors, one of the all time best combat units cant even take on HE's basic ranged core unit if Teclis is hiding somewhere on the board with the right lore (and if he has shadows then casting any spell allows him to jump around the board)... and Ive ignored the 90-120 shots that those archers should be firing at the warriors while they get accross the board and then charge (should be <8 dead WoC if they have shields)... but then lets face it; if you know you'll knobble the warriors in combat all those arrows will be shreading whole units of marauders instead.
> 
> 
> But back to the topic- same unit of warriors charge the flank of a unit of slaves costing the same as the archers from above. Thats 220 slaves in 44 ranks. WoC kill 22 slaves, slaves kill 1 warriors in return. Slaves have 39 ranks remaining, WOc have 2... slaves are stubborn with general's Ld +3-4 (cant remember the rank bonus to skaven Ld). They should be Ld10 and if there if a BSB close (and lets face it, a basic skaven BSB is so cheap as to be almost free) they should pass... and then be locked in combat with the WoC for ever more (well, about 10 combat rounds I recon- so, the rest of the game). Just as an alternate, if you move the general away and only had Stubborn Ld5-6 on the slaves they would likely run away... giving huge amounts of hits to everyone close by (D3+rank S3 isnt it? ... for about 40 S3 hits on the WoC, killing quite a few and letting the skaven bring other weapons to bear).
> The worst thing about all this is that the skaven can freely shoot into this combat, so could line the other side of the unit with globadiers and jezzails, which can kill all the warriors (after targetting anything the enemy have that can fly over or shoot/magic over the slaves- stay within a couple inches of the slaves and flyers cant even charge over).



well first of all, yes any unit is dirty if you have a 475pts charcter nearby, thats the SAME for every amry!!!!!!!!!:ireful2: the very simple solution to teclis is to eat him! and also with your remain in plays spells, people can dispel them you know :shok: and with your skaven examples shall i point out that stubborn is on your unmodified leadership, so no extra leadership for ranks:so_happy: and stubborn you rather use your leadership or the generals, and even if the general has stubborn it has no effect on the unit taking the test unless he's in their, thats hopw stubborn works k: 

so your unbreakable unit is infact ld5-6 stubborn with a re-roll, not that bad :wink:

also remember "teclis with the right lore" remember you have to pick your lore now on your army list :biggrin: so he may take a lore that isnt as good against other armys. AND i do beleive tehir is now a lore of death spell which can reduce a units T by D3. yay i have a 2/3 chance of killing teclis, oh look irristable :shok:

stop whinning, OMG i cant break units on the charge anymore, no one can, thats the point of the new edition, blocks of infantry are hard to budge, as they shoudl be!!!!

in all your arguments you have made assumptions, oh my 100 shots, oh my wizards, other people have these things as well, HELLCANNONS! here elf have a str5 template :shok: hey look my lv4 tzentch sorcerer with +7 to cast (yeah you can do that), dawrfs can get at least +4 to dispel and a bomb of dice and it barley costs them anything!!!

you are making all of these assumptions without considering what has happend to other armies :angry:

amrys have changed, the game has changed, stop complaining about it and instead make solutions to this for your armyk:

glad i got that out of my system


----------



## Khorothis

Dave T Hobbit said:


> If I understand the rules correctly, you need another non-Hero/Lord unit to make it a legal army. Your point is taken however.


And thats the Warshrine. 

@Settra

While I agree with you on this thread overreacting much, I think that the core message is valid: the Stubborn rule can be abused without much effort and that certain special characters, such as Teclis, can be retardedly powerful. However, it is a fact (at least to me) that FAQs will come out in the near future (this year methinks), or rather will have to come out because the rules have changed in such a manner that every armybook needs their respective questions answered.

And now that you've mentioned Lore of Death... I'll have to get a Sorcerer who looks like a Lich or something... and a one on fire because the Lore of Tzeentch is badass. :biggrin:


----------



## Settra

Khorothis said:


> And thats the Warshrine.
> 
> @Settra
> 
> While I agree with you on this thread overreacting much, I think that the core message is valid: the Stubborn rule can be abused without much effort and that certain special characters, such as Teclis, can be retardedly powerful. However, it is a fact (at least to me) that FAQs will come out in the near future (this year methinks), or rather will have to come out because the rules have changed in such a manner that every armybook needs their respective questions answered.
> 
> And now that you've mentioned Lore of Death... I'll have to get a Sorcerer who looks like a Lich or something... and a one on fire because the Lore of Tzeentch is badass. :biggrin:



you need at least three units excluding charcters for a legal list  i only count two  and yes lore of death is now tanterlising :biggrin:

oh and GW has said that they will be releasing FAQ's for ALL army books on the day of the realese :shok: whether they actualy do it is another matter:scratchhead:


----------



## Khorothis

Settra said:


> you need at least three units excluding charcters for a legal list  i only count two  and yes lore of death is now tanterlising :biggrin:
> 
> oh and GW has said that they will be releasing FAQ's for ALL army books on the day of the realese :shok: *whether they actualy do it is another matter*:scratchhead:


Yeah I forgot it was three HQ excluded... but then I'll just drop the shield from the BSB and 9 Warriors and get another Warshrine. 

The indicated section is what worries me most.


----------



## Tim/Steve

@settra... 4 pages and no solutions to massed blocks of cheap infantry other then 'wait for a fix'... I would say I have a point, and am not just whining. HEs cannot even do this tactic without using alies (which they can do), spearmen and Teclis are examples of incredibly powerful units in 8th, but not unbeatably so... as such they are off-topic.

And to point out some of the mistakes you have made so far I'll have to make a list... its quite long:
- Ive mentioned no nasty RIP spells, there is a RIP spells that makes 1 spell even nastier, but that is an added bonus, not really the issue itself.
- stubborn, you're using 7th stubborn, not 8th- read BRB
- general's influence does combine with stubborn
- unmodified stubborn Ld is not he same as base Ld, skaven's rank bonus still holds true (as does having a character in the unit, general near by, or additional bonuses eg eye of the gods)... its their Ld value (ie with bonuses) taken without modification, not their base value. Skaven might lose this bonus from being flanked.. not sure, not a skaven player.
- if the general is stubborn it does indeed not affect the unit... unless he happens to be in it, in which case it now does.
- slaves without the general's Ld or their rank bonus would be stubborn Ld2 I believe.. certainly not 5-6.
- choosing a 'buff' lore rather then an offensive lore means that it doesnt matter who you play. While the lore of metal needs you to have armoured opponents, increasing your S or T is helpful against absolutely everyone- a life/shadow/beasts mage never has the 'wrong lore': you choose them to suit your army (which you really ought to know).
- no death lore reduces T by D3... but there is one to reduce Ld by D3 (and there is a spell in a lore to reduce S and T by 1... still not going to kill teclis automatically).
- I have made very few assumptions and have been thinking about various possible solutions to the issue of massive blocker units... so has everyone else and as yet 4 pages in we have no solutions- not no solutions for my army... no solution for any army (other then wait and see the FAQs- which could make me very happy).
- this isnt a whining thread.. this is trying to find solutions, thats the whole point, so I gotta love being told to go find solutions: its certainly a plus to my ego that you think alone I will dobetter then a whole forum's worth of experienced gamers.


Ah, now I too can be glad Ive got that out of my system... actually I got it out of my system quite a lot; rewrote my post about 5 times getting less ranty each time (I'll leave the first draft to the imagination- made me feel happy though).


----------



## neilbatte

1 of the better things to come from this edition though is how easy it is to kill the annoying characters, (Admittedly from an Empire point of view) I played a game yesterday and both my opponents wizards were dead by turn 2, 1 from long rifles the other from a cannon.
Now fighty characters will get saves or ward saves but it is still a lot easier to target them so that they'll die quick enough as will the bsb.
By targeting them specificaly you can negate any bonus they give to the usually low ld stubborn hordes which means they are more likely to run after a messy fight.
The added bonus to this is that any unit nearby will probably run too and given the frontage of 10 wide by 10 deep or whatever is left their panic footprint is very large.


----------



## Cheese meister

you also presume in all these arguments that you don't have block infantry


----------



## Khorothis

neilbatte said:


> 1 of the better things to come from this edition though is how easy it is to kill the annoying characters, (Admittedly from an Empire point of view) I played a game yesterday and both my opponents wizards were dead by turn 2, 1 from long rifles the other from a cannon.
> Now fighty characters will get saves or ward saves but it is still a lot easier to target them so that they'll die quick enough as will the bsb.
> By targeting them specificaly you can negate any bonus they give to the usually low ld stubborn hordes which means they are more likely to run after a messy fight.
> The added bonus to this is that any unit nearby will probably run too and given the frontage of 10 wide by 10 deep or whatever is left their panic footprint is very large.


I hope you're not saying you can shoot characters out of a unit because then I want a page number and a torch...


----------



## Tim/Steve

You cant, but its a common misreading. Well, empire can with long rifles can, but cannons cant. The problem comes when the look out sir rules say that you can only use it against template weapons... but it then goes onto say that that these templates include breathe weapons, blasts and cannon fire (and no, they dont mean grapeshot- that has no template at all anymore).

@cheese meister- how is that relevant? and how have we been ignoring it? To stop a unit with 10 ranks being stubborn you need to have 10 ranks... at that scale its just about possible to manouver the unit... but when you start getting truly silly numbers of ranks you cant move the unit because its just too unwieldy (for example a 15" long unit cannot even reform to face sideways unless it has a musician- the models inside just wont have the movement to do it).


----------



## Cheese meister

there are kills to a unit of slaves lets say 50 5 wide 10 deep versus marauders 40 of 7 wide 5 deep with flails mark of khorne by the time you have lashed out with your 21 attacks the unit is trimmed down neatly and you could not have a 15 inch long unit you still have to fit in your deployment


----------



## Tim/Steve

Yeah, thats a decent counter to most non-excessivly ranked units- I think we'll see something similar in a lot of the good/tourny lists: a unit that can either be 10 wide and deal out (some) punishment, or 5 wide and 8-10 deep, not designed to kill things at all but just there to survive and cancel out ranks while a 'preoper' unit deals the damage and wins the fight. For WoC that might look like a unit og knights charging a flank while a 5-10 deep marauder unit (mebbe with shields) just hits the front and tries to avoid losing too many models (so cancelling out the work of the knights)- hammer and anvil but brought to a small scale by WFB.

EDIT- its also a sensible option... I started this thread to talk about stupidly ranked units which could well be seen in tourny play but not so much in standard games (although I have played against a 13 rank unit, and that was before we had worked out flanking doesnt break stubborn- wasnt even done by a beardy gamer).


----------



## neilbatte

What I meant by easier to kill characters is that in all the games I've played I've either faced many weak characters or 1-2 good ones, With many weak ones they die when targeted in combat, 1 or 2 good ones then is weight of fire.
Longrifles enmass are the end to an effective magic phase, where before you could face 4 wizards in a game with decent protection now your likely to see 2 with average protection and the LOS rules means you can't screen them so they have to hide in a unit or you can cannon them to death as I did in my last game. If they're in a unit not only does that add risk with the new misfire chart but also effects what they can see and how they move.
With fighty characters this is less of an issue as you want them to aid units but many armies struggle to get more than 3 or 4 characters in the list, 1 at least should be a wizard, 1 BSB and the other a general with maybe a throwaway hero which will only dilute magic allowance making the others weaker.
The armies that are weaker and cheaper by targetting units with the characters in and ignoring the massive units still has the same effect and as I said before when a massive unit flees it will take a lot of the army with it.


----------



## Tim/Steve

Characters's in units dont lose LoS- they only have 90deg total LoS at any time now... though it makes it harder to turn that area of LoS onto the enemy you want to hit.


----------



## Styro-J

What about spells that hit every model in a unit? Isn't there a HE spell that does that with like a S 3 hit or something? All of a sudden that 220 man unit of Skaven takes like 110 wounds and mass death ensues. Are there other spells that do something similar? Those would help keep the massed squads in check.


----------



## CaptainBudget

Oh yeah, that's a point! Does the Tzeench law (mortals I think it was) still have that horrible spell where you target a unit and each model takes a test (toughness I think) or die, replacing them with a horror on a roll of 6. I remember they had something suitably unpleasant that affected all models in the unit in the old book (when mortals and Daemons were one list) but I don't know about this one.

"ooh! irressistible force and I've now got a big unit of horrors in combat." Suddenly they don't look so clever.


----------



## neilbatte

Chaos dwarf blunderbusses do this too and with 3 ranks I can make every model in the unit take a ST5 hit (If I use the tourny list) failing that using the ravening hordes list everything within 12 in a straight line so its win win either way.
I think the skaven have a spell that turns the enemy unit into rats too although I don't know yet how their irresistable force works it used to be 13 not double 6


----------



## Tim/Steve

Tzeentch doesnt have a spell like that, daemons have nothing like it but WoC have traitor kin where every model makes a single attack against the unit which would be 1/4 of the unit dead for most cheap units (save DD for that), flames of the phoenix woud be nasty, as would some of the death spells... but its still only 1-2 spells per round that'll be coming at you that you really need to protect against, so so long as it isnt teclis thats not too bad... if they go off irrisistably then you might lose upto half your unit... but then the miscasts are so bad it could be worth it (fun wise its certainly worth it).


----------



## Styro-J

So, multiple Death spells work like that? So, possibly make them burn dispel dice at one such spell then stick in another. Assuming you have more dice then them, one should get through.

From what I can tell, Magic seems the most reasonable answer so far. Other than tarpitting them early on, that is.


----------



## Katie Drake

Looking at the spells, here are a few that might be useful against these gigantic monster units.

Burning Head - Basically a Strength 4 bouncing cannonball, good at squishing lots of dudes.

Piercing Bolts of Burning - D3 S4 hits for each rank of five or more models in the target unit (that'd be a lot of hits).

The Amber Spear - An auto-hitting bolt thrower. If the Wizard decides to he can summon a larger Spear that auto-hits at S10 (that'd skewer a lot of poor little dudes).

Final Transmutation - Roll a D6 for every model in the target unit. On a 5+ the model is turned to Gold (and is removed as a casualty). Yes, really. :shok:

Comet of Casandora - Much the same as before, just has a maximum radius of 2D6". Wizard can choose to cast it so that it starts with two markers instead of one at an increased casting cost. Slann in particular have a way of making absolutely certain that this spell goes off the first time they cast it and there's nothing the enemy can do except try to kill the big frog man before he casts the spell. A gigantic unit like we're talking about wouldn't have the ability to move out of the way of the comet before it hit.

That's all I see that could be potentially useful against a unit like this in the rulebook, but there could very well be more.


----------



## Settra

also remember you cant have multipules of the same spoell anymore :shok:
and in the case of final transformation if their are creatures/charcters in/are the unit then they are removed on the roll of a 6 uke: Karl franz in a unit of knights, oh i rolled a 6 he's dead :grin: 

artilery will also decimate these units, no more scatter, mortars, scarplauchers, screaming skull caterpults, hellcannons, flame cannons they are all going to hurt ALOT:scare: (in tourneys if tehy go to 3k im going to start taking 4 screaming skull caterpults uke:

also i think the casket of souls is going to be very funny now with true line of sight 

also clos combat monsters (not as in dirty as in litural monsters) such as ogres in perhaps a unit of nine or perhaps even bigger will be able to fight a large block of infantryt, if you have three ranks and a standard then you are even with them (no more outnumber) and yes you will suffer damage but so are they and in most cases you being ogres (or ushabti or dragon ogres etc) you should be able to deal out more damage then that unit.


----------



## CaptainBudget

Settra said:


> no more scatter,


WHAT!??? 
If that's a definite then that does kind of make up for the reduction in strength as you'll be causing a lot more hits in a game, but how then do you deal with misfires?

4 catapaults? I hope you're taking a lot of priests (and therefore getting 8 shots a turn) uke:uke:


----------



## karlhunt

CaptainBudget said:


> WHAT!???
> If that's a definite then that does kind of make up for the reduction in strength as you'll be causing a lot more hits in a game, but how then do you deal with misfires?
> 
> 4 catapaults? I hope you're taking a lot of priests (and therefore getting 8 shots a turn) uke:uke:


Negative, there is still scatter. It's the range guessing that was removed. One of the rules that I'm loving is the ability to fire indirectly with stone throwers, no LOS required! 

Also witht he new percentage rules my Empire Engeneers are worthwhile, now where did I put those....

One other thing to be aware of is that you can not have more than 3 of any particular special choice or 2 of a particular rare. Both of those number double at 3k+. 
Anyone need some empire mortars? I have 20 and can never field more than 6 now :cray:


----------



## maddermax

There are.... many things about this edition that I liked. However, having read the actual book, the core game is just screwed.

For those pointing out that these mega units can be broken in other ways (spells/artillery), remember that there are now counters to all of these availiable, and usually cheap, from the items list. Take your mega unit, put in a magic banner (for those units that can take one) with +1 ld, a character that gives them a ward save against war machines, another character with magic resistance, and so on. Oh, and the characters are completely safe from harm, by the way, as they'll be on the "front" of the unit, while the side will be shown to the enemy. That mega unit can completely screw any attempt to get to the war machines behind, unless you can chew through a couple of hundred enemies, or the unit fails a rerollable LD 9/10 test.....

I was a little sad, but accepting of the changes to random charge ranges, and pre measuring shooting, but "steadfast" has essentially made me rethink my stance on 8th. I've always been the one saying "it'll be ok, it'll be fine" about the new edition, but I've just become very annoyed and depressed about the outcome. It had so much potential, and has some excellent changes that I love, yet at it's heart, it's probably not a game I'll still want to play.

My own army, Bretonnians will probably be nearly unplayable until a new Army Book is released. Brets rely on breaking the enemy on the charge, and with steadfast on top of all the other changes that have blunted their charge, that just won't be possible against a lot of enemies. The best I can get with Bretonnian knights is 5 ranks, which is a 320 point unit on it's own. It's a huge points sink, and extremely hard to manoeuvre, and will probably still not out rank most basic ranked troops that enemies bring against me. Once the charge is blunted, then my unit simply gets surrounded, and beaten - off the charge, my knights just can't do enough damage to keep winning combat. Hoard armies will just soundly beat me, and there will be very little I'll be able to do against it now

I just can't believe they made flanking an essentially useless exercise against these mega units. Flanking cavalry should at least have a chance.... it should have a _point_. The games going to become a war of attrition, with elite units slowly hacking through cheap chaff for half the game - that's not the game I want to play. Honestly, Mat ward should never have been given the reins of fantasy, and probably shouldn't be given ANY warhammer project ever again.

I'll give it a go this weekend, and for a few weeks, but my friend keeps telling me to get into warmachine... and I might finally just make the switch. I'm just very disappointed about the new edition at the moment


----------



## Khorothis

Dude, you do realise that you're overreacting? You are aware that there will be FAQs introduced the moment the book is out? And of course it is only my baseless idea that the numbers for Steadfast are worked out *just before* that oh-so-dreaded Brake test, meaning that you have to worry about Steadfast if your attack has left alive more ranks than your largest charging unit. Consequently, the role played by Cavalry in the game has changed from "I'll just charge that unit, cause craploads of wounds and laugh at any I get, then brake it, pursue it and obliterate it, oh and look theres another unit within my pursue range..." to what they are supposed to be: the hammer of the anvil. It is even written in the BRB! In theory, you're supposed to have a beefy infantry unit (somewhere around 30) that charges another, then if you're not sure if they're going to deal with it alone you send in the cavalry to cause enough wounds and get the combat resolution bonus from flanking and make that unit fail its Brake test. "But what about Brets?" you ask. Well you can field enough Cavalry to make any infantry shit themselves, and if you manage to get a Fear causing character/item there you're rather likely to be fighting a unit with WS1, making your Cav even more durable.

But for fairness' sake lets assume that this issue will not be addressed. In that case your LGS has to be filled with the most vile criminals imaginable if every single one of them will abuse this rule and laugh at you for not being able to do so. Otherwise you can just tell your mates that "Hey guys, I think we can agree on a size cap for units, how about 40? Its a fair number and if you check the Tomb Kings army book you'll see that they can't field any kind of unit bigger than 40, except for Chariots but 40+ Chariots in one unit is just irredeemably retarded", and the problem is solved. 
Every tournament worth going to will have a similar cap or they will lose a considerable amount of players and reputation, because if you manage to get to the first place with your 300 big unit you're just the No.1 dick in the Warhammer community, or at least you're competing for the title.

Quitting the game is not the answer and I'm shocked to have read this from you, this wasn't the kind of attitude I was expecting. The Steadfast rule is a good rule, it makes sense and its written well, except for the limitations part. It is people abusing the rule and thus it is people who should be left to rot with their retarded army lists, not the game.

If this wasn't convincing then I've no idea what would be.


----------



## CaptainBudget

Sorry to be pedantic but Tomb Kings Chariot units have a maximum size of 12. Everything in the Tomb Kings army has a maximum unit size but your point still stands, I'm thinking of scrapping some of my chariots (they were in one unit of 6, and then had my general as well).

I do agree, steadfast is not as bad as people think, it just means you need to ditch some of that cavalry to make most 7th edition armies work. Admittedly Bretonnians and Tomb Kings need some serious changes for this edition (or a HUGE faq) for various reasons already mentioned, but coincidentally they are the two oldest army books on the shelf. It will however mean it's time to buy some more skeletons for me (which are now annoyingly overpriced given fear has been nerfed and they are not as comparably durable as other infantry)


----------



## effigy22

Hold on hold on hold... I though flank charging remained relatively the same, meaning if you flank someone (with a unit with atleast 1 rank i believe) the enemy lose all rank bonuses and benefits (much like what happens to Skaven leadership). 

I dont believe for a moment that an enemy unit being flanked would try and pull the "Steadfast" even though he counts as having no ranks? 

Or has it changed that much. (dont mind me, all i have seen of the rule book is the magic items and nothing else)


----------



## effigy22

Also on a further note: i have been told stubborn hasnt changed - so that big bad stubborn unit cannot use another models leadership.

So that big bad ass skaven clanrat unit is still leader 5? (not sure) and that big bad ass goblin unit is still leadership 6!


----------



## Khorothis

effigy22 said:


> I dont believe for a moment that an enemy unit being flanked would try and pull the "Steadfast" even though he counts as having no ranks?


But they will. Just read the explanation the book provides, it makes a lot of sense. Little orky, but realistic, IMHO.  And as far as I know, they will get the General's/BSB's Ld, especially if said model is within the unit.

@Captian Budget

I wasn't sure about the maximum size, I just read the Army Book yesterday (awesome artwork, Ushabti FTW), thanks for correcting. 
Regarding Fear, I wouldn't say its nerfed, it only changed its purpose. Like getting a sword after having an axe is indeed a nerf (wheres da choppin'?!), but you can parry with a sword much better than with an axe. Same case here: Fear won't be used to kill unit, but to better protect your own. Hitting WS2 Skellies on 4+s? Kinda humiliating methinks.  But I admit that Brets and Tomb Kings do need an update, or as you said, a huge FAQ.


----------



## Tim/Steve

Yeah, steadfast works even while flanked and stubborn units can make use of the general's LD and their stubborn rule at the same time.

Maximum sized units form the FAQ would be nice to see, but I doubt 40 models will be it... GW have put so much effort into this book to promote large blocks of infantry (and therefore sales of large numbers of infantry) that I cannot see them capping the effectiveness of any non-steadfast bonuses. So HE's will want units of 50 to make use of their 5 deep spear units and other armies will want to make use of extra rank bonuses even from hoard units (like extra ranks for CR, orky +DD banner etc).
I think we can pretty much all agree that no unit should really ever be used in more then 50 models... even that many should have a very good reason (and not just "its a blocker") or we could get some really dull games (I have flashes of skaven bell/furnace units but everywhere, in every army... and not needingt he expensive character/mount).


----------



## Shadow Hawk

I'm hoping for lore magic as well as TK magic, or at least a whole load of new spells for TK otherwise magic won't be as good. Combat is where it's at in 8th, so that makes righteous smiting less powerful, larger units so that makes incantation of vengance less effective, Summoning will be ok, leaving you to bring back skellies keep ranks and Urgency is ok, getting people to the front quicker. I'm not sure if people will even take TK spears as they aren't very good, 40 of them will only score an average of 7 kills, maybe TK will keep their mass bows.


----------



## Khorothis

Tim/Steve said:


> Yeah, steadfast works even while flanked and stubborn units can make use of the general's LD and their stubborn rule at the same time.
> 
> Maximum sized units form the FAQ would be nice to see, but I doubt 40 models will be it... GW have put so much effort into this book to promote large blocks of infantry (and therefore sales of large numbers of infantry) that I cannot see them capping the effectiveness of any non-steadfast bonuses. So HE's will want units of 50 to make use of their 5 deep spear units and other armies will want to make use of extra rank bonuses even from hoard units (like extra ranks for CR, orky +DD banner etc).
> I think we can pretty much all agree that no unit should really ever be used in more then 50 models... even that many should have a very good reason (and not just "its a blocker") or we could get some really dull games (I have flashes of skaven bell/furnace units but everywhere, in every army... and not needingt he expensive character/mount).


I know its completely irrelevant but for a moment I imagined squads of DOOMWHEELS... :laugh:

50 is still an agreeable unit size... hell, it might even look good on the board (50 Gors or Bloodletters anyone?) and it should be able to move, though wheeling might feel like Star Wars 4 when the Death Star was slooowly turning around a planet to be able to obliterate the Rebels' planet...


----------



## blackspine

Khorothis said:


> I know its completely irrelevant but for a moment I imagined squads of DOOMWHEELS... :laugh:
> 
> 50 is still an agreeable unit size... hell, it might even look good on the board (50 Gors or Bloodletters anyone?) and it should be able to move, though wheeling might feel like Star Wars 4 when the Death Star was slooowly turning around a planet to be able to obliterate the Rebels' planet...


I'm fully behind any large block of Gors. Huzzah!
I think these large formations will challenge many of us to create new and innovative ways of taking them on and adapting to the battle field.

On that note, most of these 'blocks' will be a good anchor or at least a 'tar pit' for opponents. 


* and that skaven doom wheel brigade? Genius. I would love to see that. Even if i was on the ugly end of the charge. I'm looking forward to having a nice 40 man block of gors abmushing as well.


----------



## Settra

Khorothis said:


> @Captian Budget
> 
> I wasn't sure about the maximum size, I just read the Army Book yesterday (awesome artwork, Ushabti FTW), thanks for correcting.
> Regarding Fear, I wouldn't say its nerfed, it only changed its purpose. Like getting a sword after having an axe is indeed a nerf (wheres da choppin'?!), but you can parry with a sword much better than with an axe. Same case here: Fear won't be used to kill unit, but to better protect your own. Hitting WS2 Skellies on 4+s? Kinda humiliating methinks.  But I admit that Brets and Tomb Kings do need an update, or as you said, a huge FAQ.


sorry to be padantic but ushabti have no max unit size  and Khorothis, ushabti FTW???? i have 8  yes in one unit  24 str6 I3 attacks anyone :victory:

i beleive tomb kings will keep their massed bows  in 3k at the moment im only having one block of 40 skellies and even thats under consideration (my army is based on constructs/quatar)

i wouldnt be surprise dif an FAQ appeared concerning steadfat and flank charges, also again i wouldnt be surprised if they did as it will allow the tournaments to be competative rather than a being a dick comeption 

oh and tyoo captain Budget, in answer to your question concerning the numbr of priests? it depends on how they FAQ are magic if its good then i shall take quiet a few, if not im just gonna spam princes


----------



## Tim/Steve

There will never be an FAQ changing steadfast... you can be almost certain about that. GW almost never admit they've made a mistake with any rules (eg Daemons army book) and the new BRB specifically states that steadfast isnt affacted by disruption (flanking unit with ranks).


----------



## Khorothis

Tim/Steve said:


> There will never be an FAQ changing steadfast... you can be almost certain about that. GW almost never admit they've made a mistake with any rules (eg Daemons army book) and the new BRB specifically states that steadfast isnt affacted by disruption (flanking unit with ranks).


Well we'll have to wait and see. Until then I'd stock up on anvils, so you can drop them on anyone who dares abuse the rule. I'll certainly be doing that. :biggrin:


----------



## karlhunt

I like steadfast. They put that in place of the outnumber bonus to combat res and the way they explain it it makes sense.


----------



## maddermax

Khorothis said:


> Dude, you do realise that you're overreacting? Possibly a little :laugh: You are aware that there will be FAQs introduced the moment the book is out?
> 
> I doubt the FAQs will actually change anything significantly. They'll be clarifications, the might shift some armies in a minor way, but I believe that in general they'll leave the wording of rules the same, except in the cases of the most broken rules. That's been GWs way for FAQs for quite a while, so I doubt that these new ones will be mini-updates for books at all.
> 
> And of course it is only my baseless idea that the numbers for Steadfast are worked out *just before* that oh-so-dreaded Brake test, meaning that you have to worry about Steadfast if your attack has left alive more ranks than your largest charging unit.
> 
> Yes, of course. But currently, I simply don't have the numbers or damage output to significantly weaken a mega block. On average, my charging unit of 9 knights will only take a single row of goblins out, and still be outranked by a unit of 30 (which costs about 1/3rd the cost of my knights). Only my Grail Knights have the damage output to significantly damage most units, and there's only one unit of those allowed. Not to mention the brokenness of the tactic Tim/Steve posted on the front page...
> 
> Consequently, the role played by Cavalry in the game has changed from "I'll just charge that unit, cause craploads of wounds and laugh at any I get, then brake it, pursue it and obliterate it, oh and look theres another unit within my pursue range..." to what they are supposed to be: the hammer of the anvil. It is even written in the BRB! In theory, you're supposed to have a beefy infantry unit (somewhere around 30) that charges another, then if you're not sure if they're going to deal with it alone you send in the cavalry to cause enough wounds and get the combat resolution bonus from flanking and make that unit fail its Brake test. "But what about Brets?" you ask. Well you can field enough Cavalry to make any infantry shit themselves, and if you manage to get a Fear causing character/item there you're rather likely to be fighting a unit with WS1, making your Cav even more durable.
> 
> Not really - If I can't break the enemy, wounds don't matter all that much. For the most part, my army just doesn't have the pure damage output needed for grinding down an enemy - it needs to break them to win.
> 
> But for fairness' sake lets assume that this issue will not be addressed. In that case your LGS has to be filled with the most vile criminals imaginable if every single one of them will abuse this rule and laugh at you for not being able to do so. Otherwise you can just tell your mates that "Hey guys, I think we can agree on a size cap for units, how about 40? Its a fair number and if you check the Tomb Kings army book you'll see that they can't field any kind of unit bigger than 40, except for Chariots but 40+ Chariots in one unit is just irredeemably retarded", and the problem is solved.
> 
> I generally play in a good gaming group, who aren't going to go all beardy on me. That's not the point however, the core mechanics just changed enough that small elite units (like knights) now have to fight a war of attrition against enemy hoards. I used to love the psychology of the game, but with rerolls all round with the BSB, and breaking far less likely, it's just going to end up about how many dice you roll for damage, not what tactics you used to get there. And that sucks to my mind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every tournament worth going to will have a similar cap or they will lose a considerable amount of players and reputation, because if you manage to get to the first place with your 300 big unit you're just the No.1 dick in the Warhammer community, or at least you're competing for the title.
> 
> Perhaps, but having arbitrary rules needed to make the game simply playable is one of the reasons I'm very disappointed in the new edition. I seriously doubt that GW will change things enough in the FAQs to overcome the need for a huge swathe of house rules to keep the game balanced.
> 
> Quitting the game is not the answer and I'm shocked to have read this from you, this wasn't the kind of attitude I was expecting. The Steadfast rule is a good rule, it makes sense and its written well, except for the limitations part. It is people abusing the rule and thus it is people who should be left to rot with their retarded army lists, not the game.
> 
> I was always the one with the cheery, optimistic attitude about 8th in my group. I really really like some of the changes, and there is some really good in them. But generally, the game has become far less tactical now, and far more about your list...
> 
> What would I have preferred to have seen would be a rule that made you steadfast if you had double the ranks of your opponent, or a rule that gave you +1 to your LD for every rank you outnumbered your opponent by. Even just allowing flanking to disrupt steadfast would have been awesome, and allowed for a tactical game of flanking.... but now, it's all about how many dice you can throw, and who has the best list.
> 
> 
> 
> If this wasn't convincing then I've no idea what would be.


I truly wish it was convincing... I will be trying the game properly by the way, I'm not just throwing in the towel or anything. I'll give it a good go, see what sort of games come of it, and think about where I might go with it. But my army, which I've had for twelve years now, is simply not going to work at all. I'll see what I can do with it, but I don't have hopes for the FAQ changing much. Hopefully, I'll play the actual game a few times, see that it'll work, and all will be fine. I'm just depressed about what it seems to be at the moment... Perhaps a fun game for some, but probably not a game that I'll enjoy nearly as much.


----------



## karlhunt

Are you all kidding me? The whole point of having disruption not cause you to lose steadfast is that a large unit of infantry is extremely unlikely to take to it's heels just because they got hit in the flank. Instead lets be men and turn to face the new threat. 
To my mind the only issue with steadfast is that it goes to the side witht he single unit with the most ranks so a unit for 25 night goblins 5x5 hit by units of 20 khorne warriors on all sides will still get it even though in total the warriors have 9 more ranks. that's the ONLY problem i can see with it. 

Then again it is midnight and there are other rules that jack me up more. Who came up with the idea that to disrupt I had to have at least two ranks of five models in your flank/rear? so much for the 3x3 empire detachments being worth while. Now I might as well have brought a second parent unit @ us20 and leave the detachments as my guns.


----------



## karlhunt

Khorothis said:


> I know its completely irrelevant but for a moment I imagined squads of DOOMWHEELS... :laugh:
> 
> 50 is still an agreeable unit size... hell, it might even look good on the board (50 Gors or Bloodletters anyone?) and it should be able to move, though wheeling might feel like Star Wars 4 when the Death Star was slooowly turning around a planet to be able to obliterate the Rebels' planet...


units of 100 actually look really cool on the board. I've always liked romans...


----------



## hazzaozzy

Just use 'The Dwellers Below' power from the lore of life,
'every model in the target unit must pass a strength test or be slain'
... :biggrin:


----------



## Alex

I see Maddermax's point here, after playing a few games with my Brettonians, against my Dark Elves(controlled by my Dad) the same problem came up. 
In the first game I charged 22 knights, (a unit of knights errant, and knights of the realm) including the BSB, and a paladin into the front arc of a unit and got massacred as the 35 strong corsair unit also containing a BSB and master, went first, had frenzy, and were 10 wide, so got a third rank attacking. This isn't a problem with steadfast I'm complaining about here, but the fact my knights charge isn't so effective when a mob like that goes first and massacres them. 
Trying to tackle this a different way, next game I got the errant in the flank to disrupt, and one in the front. The steadfast kept the unit in the game, and I just couldn't cause more wounds to make them have less ranks than me, especially as his Hydra finished off my third unit and then single handedly wiped out my knights errant.


----------



## Tim/Steve

@ Alex... 35 corsairs at 10 wide means they only have 2 ranks. So get a flank charge with 10-11 models in a lance formation and he's toast, especially if you have a character in there. He gets to hit you with 9 attacks with hatred.. but is still S3 and you still ahve a 2+ save (so why worry- so long as you still have 9 guys left you're fine). Knock the enemy down to under 35 models total and they aren't steadfast anymore- at that point you just need to beat them by enough to get them to run away (if you dont have a BSB and they do then you'll start with 5SCR- banner, 2 ranks, flank, charage- and they'll have 2 -banner, BSB- and while they shouldnt do any wounds you should be doing loads... they'll be lucky to avoid a LD2 test.
I dont really understand putting corsairs 10 wide- they'll be getting an extra 5 attacks vs a lance formation.... while if they were 5 wide they would be steadfast through anything you could throw at them. Anyway- never bother charging the front of an enemy unit with that many attacks if you can get in the flank: there was a guy on here a while ago who wondered why his skaven lost when he charged both flanks and the front of a unit of swordmasters- the one flnak charge gave him 3 ranks, banner, outnumber... and the other sides gave him nothing at all but lost him huge numbers of models- attacking multiple sides of an enemy unit is not always a bonus, unless you kow you'll be doing more wounds then the enemy (and for 8th can continue to do more).


----------



## maddermax

*Alex*: Yep, steadfast, low I and a few other things will give Bretonnians a lot of problems. Knight heavy just won't be a viable option, though blocks of Grail Knights will still be very effective. 

*T/S*: 35 corsairs, 10 wide probably isn't a bad formation, if you know you'll be able to survive combat first turn. After that, simply reform into deeper formation to get extra ranks. It'll get you extra attacks for a round, and if you're careful, could be handy. Or do it vice versa, if being hit by a unit of knights - survive the initial impact with a deep formation, switch to 10 wide for the extra attacks, and start winning combat.

In the meanwhile, I picked up my first warmachine stuff yesterday. I'm certainly hanging on to my Bretonnians (I've had them far too long ), though I think focussing on something else for a while might be a good idea. I'll probably still get to play my Brets quite often, as most of the other lads around here prefer 7th ed for the moment, though I won't be expanding the army any more. Ah well, we'll see what the future holds when it gets here


----------

