[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]

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.