The future of mounted characters?
- Thread starter N_Man79
- Start date
-
The masquerade of murder returns! A new game of Vampires Amongst Us has begun. Unmask the killers, trust no one, and try to survive the night. Find out more and sign up now!
Patrunkenphat7
Grave Guard
lol. I can appreciate what they're doing with 40K, getting all the books re-released quickly since it creates a more level playing field, but I think they still need to spend more time playtesting their books. The Grey Knights codex was awful, not because it is overpowered or underpowered, but because only two or three units in the codex are actually useable. The rest are poo.
Combined stats seems like a long shot as far as imagery goes. With cavalry it's understandable, since horses are normally armored and such. Even monstrous cav is kind of a long shot though. I mean look at mournfang; the ogres are armored but their mounts aren't. But for simplicity it's combined, and it works. On the other hand, Skullcrushers make sense, as their mounts are pure metal. But saying a dragon gets the armor of its tiny little rider is far-fetched. Plus T7 elves on star dragons doesn't add up to me. Or zed dragons with red fury. I think monsters are too big to combine with already powerful lord stats.
Using BS for cannons makes sense though. A "miss" can scatter away from its intended target. And then it still bounces in a straight line from the cannon. Bolts and cannonballs should probably hit the monster though, doesn't make sense that they'd hit the tiny rider in comparison to what they're aiming at. And in combat, it seems weird to be able to allocate attacks against the rider--he's so high up, how do you hit him with a sword? Do they throw their swords at him? This isn't a problem as much, as most people will attack the monster anyway for easier CR.
If GW does combine monsters to their riders, their Terror won't affect units, it'll affect players :devil2:
Using BS for cannons makes sense though. A "miss" can scatter away from its intended target. And then it still bounces in a straight line from the cannon. Bolts and cannonballs should probably hit the monster though, doesn't make sense that they'd hit the tiny rider in comparison to what they're aiming at. And in combat, it seems weird to be able to allocate attacks against the rider--he's so high up, how do you hit him with a sword? Do they throw their swords at him? This isn't a problem as much, as most people will attack the monster anyway for easier CR.
If GW does combine monsters to their riders, their Terror won't affect units, it'll affect players :devil2:
Last edited:
John Rainbow
Crypt Horror
I actually tend to think 40k is becoming more balanced because of things like this. More of the books have those units you think are 'meh' but if everyone has ok units then balance is achieved. The problem is that everyone is comparing them to the GK of the last edition or some of the Eldar/Tau units which are not well balanced in relation to the other books.
For those who don't like randomized shooting at a monster/rider, what is so off about it? It makes sense that the rider could gain some protection from his mount and that it be difficult while they are moving to aim shots at the rider.
Another option though, all shots hit the mount unless you target the rider and the rider is -1 or -2 to hit. Thoughts?
I do think cannons rolling to hit with BS and then scattering is the best solution on that end. It's making more and more sense as I think about it.
Another option though, all shots hit the mount unless you target the rider and the rider is -1 or -2 to hit. Thoughts?
I do think cannons rolling to hit with BS and then scattering is the best solution on that end. It's making more and more sense as I think about it.
Patrunkenphat7
Grave Guard
In my opinion the only thing bad about expensive lords on mounts is cannons. They are actually quite sick against everything else. So in my opinion, leave mounts as is, and fix cannons. Possibly make them inflict D3 wounds instead of D6, but somehow make them deal more damage to infantry.
Archamedius
Grave Guard
Infantry have enough problems fitting into games outside of mandatory choices as it is, things don't need to get better against infantry.
Personally I think doubling the cost of d6 wound causing items (war machines) and/or requiring a ballistic skill test would balance cannons and stone throwers out. Heck I think this would be great, and add some hilariousness to it as well:
First, increase the points costs of cannons by 50%.
Second require a ballistic skill test for cannons and stone throwers.
Third, if the ballistic skill test is failed, then instead of missing completely, roll an additional scatter die (or artillery die - there are pros and cons to each, not sure which would be more balanced). Opponent gets to pick the die result (if more than one is rolled). A successful ballistic skill test results in rules as is now.
Patrunkenphat7
Grave Guard
I disagree tremendously with your first statement that infantry has problems. Huge elite infantry blocks is by FAR the best thing you can be doing in 8th edition. Please explain.
Archamedius
Grave Guard
Huge infantry blocks are slow and terribly easy to avoid. They also act as giant point sinks that are absolutely ripe for #6 spell spam. 6 dice dwellers, purple sun, pit of shades, etc. just destroy these large blocks. Fast moving armies like Warriors of Chaos GoKarts or Dark Elf Fast cav can make them a non factor in the game by either utterly destroying them on combo charges or just avoiding them all game and killing the left overs.
Some elite infantry blocks work, but the average infantry block struggles with all the current options available to many of the top tier armies today. Heck, unless you are going to a comped tournament, you very rarely see an actual block of Chaos Warriors in a WoC army. This is because infantry struggle from poor mobility and the chariots and fast cav options are superior choices for controlling the game.
Patrunkenphat7
Grave Guard
There are only 3 or so armies that do not rely on huge blocks of infantry to win the game, and WoC is one of those armies (although the warriors themselves can still be super good). Chariots are generally terrible in the game outside WoC because they are no match for steadfast infantry blocks after they lose their 1 turn of impact hits. Fast Cav and chariots can be good supplementary units, but only because the game is built around infantry.
The "massive points sink" is actually a positive for these units, because in 8th you get no victory points unless you wipe out the massive unit.
After playing Warhammer for quite a few editions, it seems to me that infantry is better in 8th than it has ever been.
The "massive points sink" is actually a positive for these units, because in 8th you get no victory points unless you wipe out the massive unit.
After playing Warhammer for quite a few editions, it seems to me that infantry is better in 8th than it has ever been.
My experience is infantry in 8th is the strongest is ever been. Most Chaos armies I see use warriors to, so that's surprising to hear you never see that. Non-infantry can't hold up in sustained fights. When infantry is used well, it controls the game.
Archamedius
Grave Guard
Perhaps it is local meta, but where I play, except in certain circumstances, infantry are very easy to abuse. I find it hard to believe any infantry block not costing well over 600 points (and even then many of them) not succumbing to the effects of a triple charge of WoC Chariots. On average you lose 10 before you get to fight due to impact hits, and then you have to fight chaos warriors on back. Also combining flank and rear charges with fast cav dark elf units - removes your ability to reform and minimizes casualties to the dark elf player. It becomes very easy to grind down even heavy infantry.
Perhaps it is also since we are talking on a VC forum, one of the few armies that doesn't break down thanks to a bad leadership roll.
Perhaps it is also since we are talking on a VC forum, one of the few armies that doesn't break down thanks to a bad leadership roll.
Patrunkenphat7
Grave Guard
The 8th edition rule of steadfast makes large blocks of leadership-reliant infantry amazing. I'm not sure how chaos chariots can grind down combat when they lose all their impact hits, have no static combat res, and are completely owned by the steadfast rule. Chaos chariots are normally good when they ram into the flank of a unit that is already engaged with a block of warriors. I can't imagine 3 chariots standing up against an elite infantry horde by themselves.
Infantry is incredibly powerful as far as I see. A staple to all armies. It takes 2 ranks to eliminate steadfast from a flank charge which chaos chariots can't do. Although chariots in flanks generate huge CR and take little in return, it's hard to flank a unit without tying it up first. Plus with a little chaff you can prevent combi-charges like that. Or cannons or bolt throwers can eat up chariots quickly as well. Shooting can pick off chariots quickly, but infantry stays reliable unless they are being totally pelted. Chaos warriors are always in my lists. With 1 or 2 chariots for support.