# Updated Empire



## Turnip86 (Oct 7, 2011)

So, having to spend Easter in the arse end of no-where at the future in-laws next to that tiny bit of Russia that no one likes to talk about I've completely missed the release today and therefore haven't seen the new army book.

Basically to anyone that has the new book I'd like to beg you to PM me any points cost changes or major rule changes regarding state troops and militia. I'm going to add either a box of state troops or militia onto my order of the new army book but I want to see if state troops have increased in price and are therefore not worth it anymore.

Also a general overview of the new book in this thread would be good too and that wouldn't break GW or forum rules 

Thanks in advance for anyone that responds and remember don't stick any stat lines or rules straight from the book on posts that everyone can see unless you want to get reprimanded


----------



## effigy22 (Jun 29, 2008)

After reading the book the empire seem to remain the most tactically flexible army in WFB. Average at everything, few changes have annoyed the hell out of me but oh well im going to have to live with it.

The entire army screams synergy. Everything has to work together to grind out a win! 

Demigryphs seem cool at first glance but there's so much stuff that's better than them so will only male cameo appearances for my army.

All in all, book is well thought out and I don't see alot of ambiguity once you carefully read some of the more complicated rules (for example the steam tank).


----------



## elmir (Apr 14, 2011)

State troops became more expensive, cannons and mortars became more expensive. 

Empire troops are more expensive, but also a lot more difficult to break if you invest in leadership characters through "hold the line". 

New toys to give buffs to your troopers also make them more worthwhile. There seemed to be some pretty interesting synergy options in the book in terms of models that handed out area buffs.


----------



## Turnip86 (Oct 7, 2011)

Fair enough, cheers for the responses. 

Are all the state troop options viable? Or is there a preference towards halberds, spears or swords?

From the GW website, they've moved flagellants to special choices. Is that correct? So we can now have screaming fanatics as special rather than taking up points from rare choices?

And last question I can think of, crossbowmen vs handgunners. Still same points-wise?


----------



## effigy22 (Jun 29, 2008)

All state troops are still viable, each one has a role to play still. And the detachments rule has improved ALOT!

you are correct on flagellants(?). They are now special and they have also lifted the unit cap on them, but they have increased in points like alot of stuff in the book.


----------



## ExtraCrew (Jan 22, 2012)

Even with the new army book, and point increases the army will look very similar to the last book. My 2200 point army with the book almost looks and works exactly the same as mine form the old book.


----------



## Turnip86 (Oct 7, 2011)

All good info, keep it coming. It's like plastic crack but without the plastic... or crack. I need my fix of info 

How about knights, were they recosted or changed in any way that would make me want to take a unit or two without a character? 

And free company, same points? Less? More? If they're the same then I guess they'll be useful as detatchments if the detatchment rules are better?


----------



## olderplayer (Dec 11, 2009)

The new detachment rules and better battle prayers replacing the sigmar blessings may make state troops still quite viable but state troops are now more reliant on have warriors priests in the units and/or an arch lector on a war alter in range and able to get off the improved battle prayers to augment units. 

Spearmen no change (now more viable relative to alternatives)
Halberds cost more (viable, especially as detachments)
Swordmen cost more (no longer as viable as an option)
Archers cost less and now can be parent and detachment units (more viable can be used both as parent and detachments, good for hiding a master engineer or witch hunter due to skirmish rule)
Crossbowmen cost more point (less viable than before except as detachments with stand and shoot and counter charge)
Handgunners cost more point 

I do not believe that the points costs increases are justified by the improved detachment rules (which allow the points of detachments to be part of the parent unit cost and, thus, count as part of the core) and due to the improved warrior priest battle prayers. A detachment no longer automatically gets a flank charge as a counter charge but a detachment gets the pyschology benefits of its parent (ITP, stubborn, steadfast, hatred, etc.). For example, a unit of 10 archers acting as a detachment to great swords can act as stubborn roadblocks/redirectors to opposing units and can screen the great sword from BS-based shooting. Additionally, the heirloom rule that allowed one state troop unit a take a magic banner if a general led the army was lost. 

What does benefit you, however, is that knights are slighly cheaper and the inner circle knights upgrade is part of core. I really think that knights with great weapons and inner circle knights with a magic standard will now increasingly make up a significant part of core. This allows characters to get much better armour saves and to be mounted and has synergy with demigryph knights clearly being undercosted as a single rank unit (supporting attacks are not good due to rider not being the heavy hitter). Also, Reiksguard knights are special units that have the inner circle upgrade and a modest points cost increase for being stubborn. Thus, a cavalry-focused army is quite viable with the higher armour saves and ability to run a stubborn unit. A unit of regular knights with great weapons and inner circle knights may prove to be a better choice than greatswords just because of the greater mobility, improved armour save and ability to count as core. 

As for special, pistoliers are still worth running (pistols have range 12") as are outriders, huntsmen are much cheaper but pretty weak skirmisher/scouts (should have a better BS given the description). 

Flaggelants were increased in point cost signficantly, no longer unbreakable, have a less reliable martyr rule, and only have frenzy (which can be lost if they lose combat). This allows other models to join the unit but at a tremendous increase in cost and no ability to make them core. Thus, doubt you will see a lot of these guys anymore. 

Mortars were really nerfed by being made significantly more expensive and given only S2 for hits not in the center. Great cannons had a points cost increase but are still worth playing. The biggest problem is that master engineers now much choose in advance which warmachine they are going to lend their abilities to and, once having made that choice, they cannot shot their weapons. The only positive is an engineer gets one re-roll of a scatter or art dice and to use its BS to boost as war machine. 

Rare
Give that master engineer rules, the new rules for hellblaster volley guns (HBVG) will make the master engineer best for that unit. With an engineer on a HBVG, one can dramatically reduce the risk of a complete misfire (two misfire rolls) and increase the number of hits and the hit rate (+1 to BS) such that the gun can potential tear up a pretty tough unit. 

Master engineers can no longer join a warmachine (replacing one of the crew), so they might be in a cheap unit of archers to max los and give the archers the ability to block attacks on the war machines (especially if detachments to steadfast or stubborn parent units). Thus, you will like see then placed in a unit within 3" of a cannon and a HBVG and allocated to the cannon if the HBVG is not in range and then allocated to the HBVG once enemy troops are within 24". 

The new wizard chariots are not impressive. They are probably just cheap enough to consider playing. The buffs are neat but the low armours save and low or no ward save makes these expensive chariots with some limited range augments and bound spells. The bound spells will often compete with the battle prayers of WPs once in combat. 

The stank is cheaper and has more options in some ways. Its movement is less reliable in range but the random movement rule is annoying to opponents (like the hellpit abom of skaven). It is more likely to misfire early but with less steam points, the consequences are managable. Using steam points, the stank can shoot its cannon (when not in combat) for a much longer range. However, it also has the ability to continue to function when it has taken on wounds (take fewer Steam points and roll to see if one does not misfire). 

The hellstorm rocket may be worth considering because of its potential for multiple template hits but the indirect fire rule is troublesome. 

Warrior priests are now a lot cheaper, have better battle prayers to augment the units they are in, and can channel power dice and dispel dice (the loss of the ability to generate dispel dice was pretty much expected in 8th edition). You are likely to see WPs spammed in multiple units for this reason along with a lvl 4 wizard (made slightly cheaper). The general of the army is much more likely to be the general now and captains with their hold the line 3D6 break tests and reasonably low points costs would be worth playing in units of knights. Because demigryph knights are likely to be point efficient and worth taking and are monstrous cav, you can put a captain on a peg in a larger unit of demigryph knights and gain an extra wound for the captain with the peg and hit reasonably hard (pegs get two attacks) and have the ability to fly the captain out to hit something like a chariot, war machine, skirmishers, or fast cav unit.


----------



## Turnip86 (Oct 7, 2011)

olderplayer said:


> Cheers for that - Not going to quote the whole thing to save space



Looks like the plan I had for a 2k list a few months back is going to be the way I go although I'll be running different characters and maybe have some chocobo riders added in.

I've heard the light wizard-mobile is pretty good for augment spells, especially when coupled with a warrior priest in a unit. How true is that? Or is it still too vulnerable to run?


----------



## Atreyu (May 30, 2011)

I hear that the pretty chariot toys are cool and relatively cheap but don't have much in the way of protection.


----------



## ExtraCrew (Jan 22, 2012)

Flaggelants are still unbreakable, and still the single best unit in the army, the unit size cap was lifted. mortar is still fairly good sure str 2 but still armour piercing. so you would 30-25 guys on 6s against what you shoot with it still in the realm of resonable.

By far the best war machine is the HBVG. with engineer. 

The buffs for the mage chariots and the war alter make using one of them in your army a must have. 

Cav really not that great at all. still not a preference to troops and guns.

NO new knight models and it doesnt look like any plans on it in the future.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Are you sure they're Unbreakable, everyone is saying they're not now. Just Frenzied. 

My big question is why did they make Demigriff Cav T3, that seems bonkers.


----------



## effigy22 (Jun 29, 2008)

They are still unbreakable, they went up in points though and moved to special.

Their end is nigh rule has changed as well. They take d6 str3 hits then you consult the chart to see what rule they get from the amount of casualties.


----------



## olderplayer (Dec 11, 2009)

I am almost certain flagellents are not unbreakable, they are stubborn, but I have the book at home (not work) and will verify. They have frenzy instead of crazed, which means that they can now lose frenzy if they lose combat. 

On Demigryphs, unfortunately the rider determines toughness and the rider is an inner circle knight which is T3. Of course, they could have said that they were as tough as captains given their elite status. You do get 3 wounds and a 1+ AS and all those high S, AP demigryph attacks plus a stomp. I'd pay the points cost just for the 3 S5 AP attacks with WS4 and I4 and a 1+ AS. One question I have to research is whether the rider being a standard human makes the demigryph knight model vulnerable to killing blow as is the case with standard cav. It is kind of confusing as to why a captain or general cannot mount a demigryph but, being monstrous cav, at least a character on a peg can join the unit and get a look out sir (and +1 wound if a 2W hero) which is not a bad option. 

I don't really think they needed new knight models. You now have core knights, inner circle knights, Reiksguard and demigryph knights with core and inner circle having a great weapon option and demigryph knights having a cav halberd. The existing models have decent detail and can be converted. They did give us a stubborn special inner circle knights unit in Reiksguard where the price for stubborn is not that steep. It would have been nice to have cav hammers that gave +1S and still allowed a shield in place of lances or at least allowed the hits to be at initiative (like the cav halberds for demigryphs), but they missed that chance. 

I don't see why the new war alter kit could not have been made a dual kit with a war wagon option given that the war wagon is a natural empire model, instead of the goofy wizard chariots shooting bound spells and giving minor augments to units only within 6".


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

So are empire armies small and more elite now? Also I have knights but they have lances and shield, is it definitely better them having Great weapons?


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

You won't be vulnerable to Killing Blow as your unit type is Monstrous Cavalry. That Killing Blow FAQ only really applies to ridden monsters as far as I can tell as you can attack the rider himself separately from the monster.


----------



## olderplayer (Dec 11, 2009)

"Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted."

I think that is right (the issue came up wrt bloodcrushers) but it is kind of inconsistent with the idea of killing blow against mounted characters. The actual rule clearly states that KB "is only effective against infantry, cavalry and war beasts-all other creatures are considered either too larger to be felled by a single blow (monsters, monstrous infantry/cavalry/bets, chariots, and so on) or too numerous for a well-placed strike to slay them (swarms)."


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

That FAQ ruling is just plain wrong... no getting round that. I wouldn't try to claim a KB against a cav/monstrous cav character.

I thought monstrous cav units took the higher T of rider and mount (same as wounds)... but guess I could have been wrong (only monstrous cav I use are terradons and mournfang... both of which have the same T for rider and mount).


----------



## olderplayer (Dec 11, 2009)

Page 82 says the mounts toughness and wounds are never used for standard cavalry and the WS of the rider is used for determining hits by opposing models. 
Page 83 says that monstrous cav apply all the normal rules of split profile for standard cavalry except that the number of wounds is the greater or the rider or the mount. This, BTW, is why putting a hero on a peg gives the hero an extra wound in addition to an extra +1 AS and the attacks of the peg as a benefit.

BTW, the FAQ is inconsistent in that a normal rider on a monster or chariot or monstrous mount is immune to KB but the character is not immune to killing blow.


----------



## KarnalBloodfist (Jan 30, 2010)

Words_of_Truth said:


> So are empire armies small and more elite now? Also I have knights but they have lances and shield, is it definitely better them having Great weapons?


Depends on how you look at things. Do you want your knights to have +2S on the turn they charge only and get to strike in order of I? Or do you want your knights to have +2S all the time but to also have the _Always Strikes Last_ special rule to boot? I haven't played Empire in some time so I couldn't really tell you what would be best.


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

Lance gives you +2S on charge... and you are unlikely to break any enemies on charge. Meaning you get stuck in lots of prolonged combats with less chance of winning.

Great Weapon makes you do more damage all the time, but also robs you of your shield in combat... meaning you kill more and die more quickly. Fights will be more decisive, but not necessarily in your favour.

... basically depends what you want your knights to do.


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

Well I got a 24 strong unit of great swords with halberdier detachments, but also 20 pistoliers, so dunno. Don't think I have the bits for great weapons either.

Btw can warrior priests join detachments? Just wondering where to put mine now and was wondering if I should stick them with halberds or with greatswords.


----------



## ExtraCrew (Jan 22, 2012)

I dont see the confusion of unbreakable, other than it is people that have not read the book or have poor reading comprehension. Unbreakable. 

it doesnt say anything about characters join detachments, however it is not that advantageous to do so, because any effects that character gives the unit would only effect that detachment and not the regimental unit. were as if he is in the regimental unit the effect would go to both units. 

So if you plan on keeping the detachment within 3 inches of the regiment then it is better to have a Warrior Priest in the regimental unit. if you plan on moving the detachment outside 3 inches then adding a character to the unit may be wise depending on what they are doing. 

also the detachment must be with in 3 inches to get any bonus from the regimental unit. Also as of now spells that effect the regimental unit do not effect the detachment, that will need an faq, but I understand why it doesnt.


----------



## Atreyu (May 30, 2011)

They may or may not but remember that detachments benefit from any psychology rules from the parent so I personally don't see the reason to do that.

EDIT: ExtraCrew just ninja'd me xD he has a better answer than I could pull out!


----------



## olderplayer (Dec 11, 2009)

On the lance versus great weapon issue, a lot depends on what you will be facing and whether you have inner circle knights (S4) or core knights (S3). If you are running a larger unit with the intention of it sticking around and fighting higher T units, then great weapons are more reliable and important because the increase from S3 to S5 is huge (both dramatically increases chance of wounding and cutting through the armour save) even if you lose the 1+ AS to 2+ AS because you will kill so much more. If you want a smaller stubborn unit for flanking charges and charging monsters, like Reiksguard, you are better off with lances (I think Reiksguard don't have a GW option anyway). The initiative of knights is only middling, so you will often be hitting second against elite units very often anyway, so the ASL penalty is more tolerable.

BTW I checked and flaggies are still unbreakable in the new book (damn those rumors, they kind of get stuck in the brain and hard to undue them).


----------



## ExtraCrew (Jan 22, 2012)

I think of all the stats that should of been increased on knights it would be I or A, even if it was only on the inner circle knights and they remained str 3. It would have given lances the edge over GW which is what I fell knights should be armed with, however Since that is not the case GW are the better choice all around.


----------

