Crumble, pro or con and dealing with it tactically

[najo]

So, I hear pretty regularly that some players hate our crumble. I like to see what percentage that player base is. Please vote in poll and then explain your opinion, pros or con's below. If you have good tactics related to crumble, or crumble issues you need help with, please share those too.

 

[cofius]

Voted for otion A.

I'am a fluff player and i enjoy everything that comes with our Vampire book, imo we have one of the best writen books out there and it is fun to play...

If the crumble rule was writen any other way i think we were be one hard to beat army, something that you cant break, always healing, and noone would play against such army...

Our army, like any other for that mater, needs to know the waekneses of it and the enemies army also, and then plan your moves, it is something that we allready know

So for me the rule has a good undead feel and shouldn't be changed.

 

[filescraps]

Voted A.
The thing I find the most annoying part about the rule is that I tend to never combo-charge. You can't tie things up with zombies and flank with a Vargulf. Would be nice,with some save against the crumble, but I think it would be to good. I think it was fine when you wasn't allowed to over run, but then again; the raise dead was op. 9+ to make the opponents death star move 1" per turn you achieved this by making it charge you in the side forcing it to wheel 90 degrees or conga line 2d6+3 zombies 1" away.
The good thing is that when I go up against heavy hitters with few attack I know that I won't fail a steadfast 9 test and run away.
Last match I played 3 vargheists got flanked by 3 ogre bulls, normally I would have taken a break test on a 5 isch. With rumble I "know" that I'll stick there to my turn.
Generally I have a problem with the Undead rule denying any other charge reaction then hold.

 

[Blutsauger]

Crumble is a massive con. Not because it makes it hard to win games, but because it doesn't match the background of the army, discourages intuitive game play and makes it impossible for us to reap the same benefits other armies do. It's a clumsy mechanic and it should be removed in the next edition.

 

[najo]

Crumble is a massive con. Not because it makes it hard to win games, but because it doesn't match the background of the army, discourages intuitive game play and makes it impossible for us to reap the same benefits other armies do. It's a clumsy mechanic and it should be removed in the next edition.

What would you replace it with. Why does it not fit the background? Did you vote on the poll?

 

[Banshee Talespinner]

Crumble seems to be a detriment that allows the game designers to grant us ItP, Undead and Unbreakable. Makes you think defense when creating lists. On its own it's pure crock; why would you play an army that had Crumble and no counterbalancing benefits? DI is better as a standalone "attribute".

 

[Von Calyptra]

I don't understand this. What are the pros to crumbling? How is instability strong or game-winning?

 

[Dancing Skeleton]

I assume he means crumble as in (unstable/unbreakable)

I love it. The irony is I feel like you have way more control over your army with crumble. You can predict what kind of losses you will be taking from crumble based on your unit and what it's fighting. In an even match you can expect not to lose too many guys and if you have a bad round there is always IoN.

On the flip side, having to take break tests seems way more random. Even if your unit is superior, if you get a few bad dice rolls and fail one round of combat there is a decent chance you will flee and possibly lose the entire unit from pursuit!

 

[Swissdictator]

I didn't vote, mainly because I've stepped aside from VC for a while until now.

I think it needs some tweaking to be right. First and foremost... we gain nothing from being steadfast (aside from simply denying it). I think we need something, such as -d3 to our losses if we crumble.

Also, if Invocation was tweaked, it would help A LOT. Look at the 6E version as a guide. What I expected when this book dropped was something like that one. Target a *single* unit (how often do we really need to target several units anyways... it is usually only one, maybe two needing help) and choose a level. Low is 1D6, Medium is 2D6, and Big is 3D6 (with a boost for zombies). Really, just take that 6E version, let it target any unit (with limits on monsters and such as we have now), and perhaps tweak the casting value. Suddenly our crumble isn't as massive a liability as it is now. Nor is it overpowered as decent magic defense by the opponent will ensure we're not too crazy.

That's basically it. I think the biggest problem with crumble is the horrifically weak ability to raise our guys back, which is what VC should be about: going "I need those guys back *cast*". Fighting our core should be about attrition.


EDIT:

It's the thing with 8th... there are generally A LOT more attacks (and thus ability to shift combats more strongly) than when crumble was conceived.

 

[Pirate Robot Ninja of Death]

Crumble is an objectively negative mechanic. Unless your couching the question on whether Unbreakable/ITP outweighs it then I don't really see how you could consider losing models every round an advantage...

That said, it's not AS bad as some might say. It does fundamentally change how the army runs, and is thoroughly frustrating on occasion. A lucky impact hit roll, for instance, and I'm losing half my unit of grave guard...steadfast or no. I guess it's analogous to our enemies losing a warmachine and having half their army panic off the table, but that's exceedingly rare whereas crumble is a mathematical certainty.

That said, I *do* like that I can mathhammer the anticipated outcomes. I just wish that steadfast would mitigate it in some way, or that elite units lost less, or that I could throw my vampires into a unit with SCR without worrying about just blowing up.

 

[Zhatan]

The thing I dislike about it is that it punishes you for using weak units like zombies and skeletons as they crumble so much. Hordes of weak troops should be what we are all about.

 

[midean]

I think the way crumble is now is terrible. If they made steadfast helpful so if we lost combat and were steadfast we would crumble over what the units LD was. And make it so that characters didn't crumble. I mean a VC Lord has been around for 500 years and all of a sudden falls to pieces cause a couple skeletons die around him....Really?

 

[Emicrania]

i voted pro,even thought it should not affect vampiric unit in the same way. it doens't fit the bg and is kind of silly,for the rest is just about right,we ress and die on the same rate,or about it.

 

[najo]

I didn't vote, mainly because I've stepped aside from VC for a while until now.

I think it needs some tweaking to be right. First and foremost... we gain nothing from being steadfast (aside from simply denying it). I think we need something, such as -d3 to our losses if we crumble.

Also, if Invocation was tweaked, it would help A LOT. Look at the 6E version as a guide. What I expected when this book dropped was something like that one. Target a *single* unit (how often do we really need to target several units anyways... it is usually only one, maybe two needing help) and choose a level. Low is 1D6, Medium is 2D6, and Big is 3D6 (with a boost for zombies). Really, just take that 6E version, let it target any unit (with limits on monsters and such as we have now), and perhaps tweak the casting value. Suddenly our crumble isn't as massive a liability as it is now. Nor is it overpowered as decent magic defense by the opponent will ensure we're not too crazy.

That's basically it. I think the biggest problem with crumble is the horrifically weak ability to raise our guys back, which is what VC should be about: going "I need those guys back *cast*". Fighting our core should be about attrition.


EDIT:

It's the thing with 8th... there are generally A LOT more attacks (and thus ability to shift combats more strongly) than when crumble was conceived.

If IoN were that way, I'd be nearly unstoppable. I have tournament games now where I all kill an opponent and with the current IoN I heal the majority of my damage. Last time I played in a tourney (about two months ago), I did this to a WoC army. I usually have this happen about once every other tourney. It occasionally happens in friendly games, though rarer.

With 3d6, I'd be regaining double on my infantry and up to x3-4. My vampiric and ethereal units getting 3 wounds per casting! My hexwraiths would be unkillable. As of now, they end the game at half their starting strength.

There is a reason they kept changing IoN, that's because it was too powerful. Current version is the most balanced version. If they were to do anything to it, you could fine tune the items and units that interact with it. Corpse cart and dark acolyte being tweaked would be OK.

 

[najo]

I find the certainity of crumble and not having to make a check its strength. Daemons roll box cars and POOF! Being mathhammer unbreakable removes randominess. Add in IoN and other ways to control attrition, and crumble becomes a tool we use to distress our opponent.

Think about the flip side. If you've moved and been charged on your terms. Then you've planned for crumble. Your opponent gets his licks in, and you lose a few guys then crumble a few, out of a 40 man unit. Meanwhile, the vampire in that unit is destroying him. He then does the estimates on how many rounds he is locked in with the crumbling. Realizes the vampire and its unit will kill him before he can cause you to crumble. Then you get off an IoN or two.

If you're not doing it, start estimating crumble rates when deploying and before getting into combat. Let your crumble detectors determine how you deploy and move. Pick fights based on positive crumbling results.

 

[Kromul]

I think crumble as it is right now isn't bad per se. I used to think that on my early days with Vampire Counts but know I got used to it. The only thing I REALLY hate about the rule is that our characters suffer from it too. Why in the hell my vampire dies if those stupid orcs killed some skeletons ignoring him?!? Totally dumb part of the rule that I would like to see it changed to something like: characters make a LD test to run or to stay in combat.

Edit: I voted for daemonic is better but I would need a new one option really

 

[Skittelz1981]

Najo, sorry but what people do you play?
Hexwraiths that end the game at half strength everytime?
I have 1 fixed Darkelf opponent that always brings 2x5 doomlocks. First thing he does is cast Doombolt twice on it. 1x large version, 1 times small version. Usually a full group of 10 is then dead in turn 1. Hes always going for IF on it since it doesnt matter at all on Doomlocks.
When i play Dwarfs, first thing he does is rampage my hexies with his Organgun,
The list goes on about opponents that easily crush the hexies with only a slight bit of luck.



On the other hand, i agree we should have Crumble. Just not on Vampiric things. Vampires, Varghulfs, etc etc, they shouldnt be Crumbling, especially not in a combo-charge. WTF is a TG dying through Crumble because skeletons lost a bunch of models and CR, like the TG cares and as if the lost CR is decreasing the magical power holding the TG up...... Same goes for all these monsters and vampiric units we have that shouldnt be affected by Crumble the way it is now. Crumble is weak silly units. Undead monsters and characters are way above that. It needs to be tweaked and rewritten into something a bit more gullible and fair.

 

[najo]

Najo, sorry but what people do you play?
Hexwraiths that end the game at half strength everytime?
I have 1 fixed Darkelf opponent that always brings 2x5 doomlocks. First thing he does is cast Doombolt twice on it. 1x large version, 1 times small version. Usually a full group of 10 is then dead in turn 1. Hes always going for IF on it since it doesnt matter at all on Doomlocks.
When i play Dwarfs, first thing he does is rampage my hexies with his Organgun,
The list goes on about opponents that easily crush the hexies with only a slight bit of luck.



On the other hand, i agree we should have Crumble. Just not on Vampiric things. Vampires, Varghulfs, etc etc, they shouldnt be Crumbling, especially not in a combo-charge. WTF is a TG dying through Crumble because skeletons lost a bunch of models and CR, like the TG cares and as if the lost CR is decreasing the magical power holding the TG up...... Same goes for all these monsters and vampiric units we have that shouldnt be affected by Crumble the way it is now. Crumble is weak silly units. Undead monsters and characters are way above that. It needs to be tweaked and rewritten into something a bit more gullible and fair.

My question for you is why run your hexwraiths headlong into units that kill them so easily. I play regularly against daemon armies with Khannons and honestly my hexies get through that. The answer is complex. My games involve a lot of deployment tricks, feigns, denied flanks etc. My opponents attempt to kill my hexwraiths, but honestly I'm good at using my units to draw fire from them and keep my general hopping between units so the hexwraiths have a path to march through and stay out of range.

The comment I get alot from players not used to playing me is "your vampires move so fast!" I'm big on deployment, controlling the movement pacing, screwing up my opponent's movement and getting into tricky places. I don't want my opponent able to think, I want him reacting to my aggressive enroachment on his deployment zone.

So, keeping hexwraiths out of danger and in the flanks is part of that. Sometimes that means keeping back and circling around like with dark elves. Other times its rushing a gunline with wolves, hexwraiths and my vampire's bunker, then between vanguard 12", marching 16" and a VHDM 8" = 36", so I just ran up and over two war machines and did 6 S5 armor ignoring hits to each.

 

[Pirate Robot Ninja of Death]

Perhaps I just haven't figured out how to use them, but think I've had one game where my hex wraiths survived past turn 4. They're the first thing that people magic missile, and so many armies these days have magic shooting that it's ridiculous.

Perhaps that's just the opponents I'm facing though. Warriors, Wood Elves, Lizardmen, Bretonnia (with heavens). They evaporate before I can even use them.

 

[MageoftheBones]

The one thing I miss from the last book and the only book for Vampires that had it was the chance to take ward saves against the crumbling which would really change the surviability of the lord and certainly my current army build with Terrorghists. The real kick in the groin is to be winning the game and suddenly caught a horrible charge from Chaos Warriors lose my Lord in an epic combat which then causes my giant flying bats to leave the table or get wounded so badly they have no effect at LD 4.

Other than the ward save thing going away, I think it generally can be managed well save the general dying in most cases. Just have to be more careful with him and his knights against Chaos in the meantime though.

 

[najo]

Perhaps I just haven't figured out how to use them, but think I've had one game where my hex wraiths survived past turn 4. They're the first thing that people magic missile, and so many armies these days have magic shooting that it's ridiculous.

Perhaps that's just the opponents I'm facing though. Warriors, Wood Elves, Lizardmen, Bretonnia (with heavens). They evaporate before I can even use them.

Target saturation. Be aware of spell ranges. Move them away from threats and then up, usually as a denied flank. Also, stopping the right spells and letting others through. Most armies only have a handful of magic muscles and direct damage. Put more immediate threats on the wizard. For example, varghiests moving up as a flanker can force your opponent to react and divid or distract them. Again, so many little things. I also shove my vampire's unit up into a soft spot in their army. He draws attention and heat fast. Some of which comes off the hexies.

 

[hairyjeff]

I am massively opposed to crumble as it now is. Vampires and characters should NOT be subject to it. troops- yes, I can see the sense there, IoN can rebuild you with a little luck. If we also had steadfast advantage, it would probably work fine, I accept that a smaller unit suffers more.

 

[Blutsauger]

What would you replace it with. Why does it not fit the background? Did you vote on the poll?

In a perfect would I would keep crumble. But there would only be two conditions under which a unit would crumble.

1 - A unit would take a crumble test at the end of the phase in which the general is slain. At the start of the next VC turn, a wizard using the Lore of the Vampires may assume control of the army. If this wizard is subsequently slain, repeat this process.

2 - A unit would take a crumble test if, at the end of it's turn, it is not within 12" of a Necromancer or Vampire, or within 18" of the army general.

I wouldn't require the Vampire or Necromancer to be using the Lore of the Vampires as I assume that the power required to keep a unit tied to undeath is such an innate magical ability for the VC wizards that they can do it even when utilising spells from a different lore. Keeping the entire army bent to their will requires more specific necromantic ability and as such, the general (and his substitutes) would still need to be using the lore of the vampires.

Crumble (in it's current incarnation) doesn't fit the fluff for several reasons.

Have you ever seen a Zombie movie where our heroes slay one zombie, and another one nearby drops dead out of sympathy? No, it's ridiculous. Why would brainless undead care that they are losing a combat? Its the magical will of the general that keeps them alive and motivates them. If anything, when their numbers are reduced through combat he should be able to focus MORE energy on them, not less. And finally, why would a centuries old Vampire or a savage bloodthirsty monster like a Varghulf care if some zombies or skeletons are slain in combat? Can you imagine it? "Oh no, some of my numberless and utterly meaningless minions have been slain! The pain is too much, I must die with them!"

No.

I mean, it's easy and it's simple, but it's not the best way to represent the nature of the undead.

 

[Skittelz1981]

My question for you is why run your hexwraiths headlong into units that kill them so easily. I play regularly against daemon armies with Khannons and honestly my hexies get through that. The answer is complex. My games involve a lot of deployment tricks, feigns, denied flanks etc. My opponents attempt to kill my hexwraiths, but honestly I'm good at using my units to draw fire from them and keep my general hopping between units so the hexwraiths have a path to march through and stay out of range.

The comment I get alot from players not used to playing me is "your vampires move so fast!" I'm big on deployment, controlling the movement pacing, screwing up my opponent's movement and getting into tricky places. I don't want my opponent able to think, I want him reacting to my aggressive enroachment on his deployment zone.

So, keeping hexwraiths out of danger and in the flanks is part of that. Sometimes that means keeping back and circling around like with dark elves. Other times its rushing a gunline with wolves, hexwraiths and my vampire's bunker, then between vanguard 12", marching 16" and a VHDM 8" = 36", so I just ran up and over two war machines and did 6 S5 armor ignoring hits to each.

Im not running my hexwraiths headlong into units that kill em. Try avoiding a 24" Doombolt from a fastcav-casting unit.... He is ALWAYS in position to cast on them and there is hardly anything to counter it. Targetsaturation doesnt work with him since whatever happens, he is going to Doombolt-hunt a unit of 10 hexwraiths in the first 2 tuns. I usually end up blasting my scroll and all my dice against this but an increased Doombolt with 4d6 S5 hits cast on IF is simply game over for anything that is getting hit.

 

[Skittelz1981]

IoN can regain wounds on units but cannot regain wounds on characters? lol, why are my characters crumbling then?