Kirb your enthusiasm!

WEBSITE HOSTED AT: www.3plusplus.net

"Pink isn't a color. It's a lifestyle." - Chumbalaya
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit
"I buy models with my excess money" - Valkyrie whilst a waitress leans over him


Thursday, August 18, 2011

Warhammer Fantasy 8th Edition - Balance


The latest edition of Fantasy is a bit of an enigma. It comes across much better compared to previous editions and in most respects, plays a lot better. There are however a few things which stand out. One is the randomness of a lot of aspects within the rules, specifically terrain and charges. Whilst it's pretty easy to simply ignore the terrain rules we have to wonder what they were thinking in regards to having a random amount of terrain which have random effects. Terrain in 5th edition 40k, even though there are strict guidelines, are bad enough because so many people don't follow them. When you do follow them and specifically have line of sight blocking terrain, well 40k plays a lot better. With this in mind they had a good template on which to base things and threw all semblance of order out the window. Plain odd... Random charges also really hurts. Those double 1's or combination of low numbers do come up and whilst obviously getting as close as possible minimises this, having a unit which is in charge range of your opponent 95% of the time fail to charge, well that hurts. This is mildly comparable to difficult terrain tests in 40k but as many will point out, they don't like the randomness in that either.

And then we turn to magic - specifically the 'ultmiate' spells of many of the regular lores in the rulebook. The raw ability of these spells to simply devastate whole units in single turns is staggering and this is where a lot of 8th edition can come unstuck. Not that magic can decimate units but to the extent and ease that it can and if you cannot defend against this or do the same back to your opponent, you are very likely to lose. Consider what Nikephoros points out in this post - there is a semblance of balance in terms of army composition to 'address' the power of magic. This displays itself as follows:

Magic/Warmachines > Mass units/hordes
Mass units/hordes > multiple small units (MSU)
MSU > magic/warmachines

Magic and Warmachines decimate large bodied units. Their damage is often predicated on having a lot of models to damage. Warmachines use blasts or lines to determine damage and with the block formations of Fantasy, if these hit they will cause a lot of damage. The ultimate magic spells often force models to pass tests to survive and obviously the more models that need to test, the more models which are likely to fail. There are also blast magic spells as well, particularly RIP (remain in play) spells which can run around causing damage for multiple turns. All in all, being a large unit against magic and warmachines sucks.

On the flip side, smaller units care far less. It's harder to hit them with large blasts or lines or at least hit a lot of them at once and spells which force pass or fail tests have less impact on units with less bodies. The problem with MSU units is of course their damage output and their inability to shift large units thanks to steadfast. They are also far more vulnerable to damage from conventional means such as shooting and close combat to the point where they are in effective. MSU can survive a barrage of magic and warmachine firepower great but you are vulnerable to normal shooting and need multiple units to charge at once to have any chance of breaking large units.

What this ends up being is a world of rock-paper-scissors - what people commonly believe 40k is when it's not. There are clear advantages and disadvantages for each unit type and if armies of only those unit make-ups faced each other upon the table-top, one army would have a clear advantage. If one could incorporate all of these aspects into an army list though, they would have an apparently balanced army list. Unfortunately, whilst certainly possible, this is does not seem to be the case in terms of how the game unfolds and we look back to magic as the one factor that can unhinge this.

Let's take a couple of armies as an example. Both have excellent casters which can throw dice at ultimate spells with miscast protection. Large units which do a couple roles really well. Some Warmachines backing them up to further cause damage to large opposing units and provide early ranged firepower. Scouts to movement block in early phases of the game. Both have some MSU units to give more movement options, harass warmachines, avoid massive firepower, etc. Who wins can depend a lot upon player ability of course but let's assume both players are equal in every respect. The winner is then nearly always decided upon who kills the other's mage first. Not only does this take a lot of firepower away from your opponent but it hurts their defenses against magic for the rest of the game. This means in terms of list building one doesn't really have to focus on all three aspects of the rock-paper-scissors premise but rather ensure they can eliminate their opponent's rock (magic) whilst protecting their own. By then having a weakness to paper (MSU) they can cover this with their scissors (horde units) if they can ensure their survival by eliminating the rock (magic) as early as possible or vice versa.

Now let's assume magic was less powerful. Let your imagination run wild on how this might be but let's say warmachines become the more reliable way to deal with hordes with magic acting as a supplementary force. Warmachines are a lot less reliable than high level mages with miscast protection with misfiring and artillery dice added in. Thus, whilst they are still powerful against hordes they aren't the be all and end all that magic currently is. This would still leave a rock-paper-scissors design in terms of units which is fine when they can all be incorporated into a singular army which isn't going to be rick-rolled by an army not following this principle. With the reduction in the power of the ultimate magic spells, supporting spells might see more regular use. They are certainly used currently but more often than not play a distant second fiddle to damage spells of massive power.

Regardless, if this were the case, I imagine Fantasy would be a lot more balanced. You would see the theory of taking magic/warmachines/MSU/hordes applied more readily, rather than focusing on a couple of those aspects. It would be harder to make uni-dimensional lists and do well against any list opposing you which you currently can do with massive magic ability. There would still be some issues in regards to rules (i.e. terrain, random charge distance, etc.) but there wouldn't be this one over-riding factor which can unhinge whole armies. With that in mind 8th edition Fantasy is massively better than previous incarnations - just with this massive elephant in the room. It's still fun to play but as Nike has been pointing out in his series, it really is the 'beer and pretzels' game by Games Workshop. You can play it competitively and there are a set of skills which are required to play the game well. You just have to understand there are going to be games that are lost and won simply due to magic and this can limit the competitive application of the game. It's still fun, don't get me wrong, just don't get butthurt when you lose or when someone points out the inherent imbalance within 8th edition.

Comments (35)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Shadowmancer's avatar

Shadowmancer · 711 weeks ago

With the random charge length it is there as a countermeasure for premeasurement. What came first is up in the air, but that is what I think the designers went for with the random charge length.

The only terrain I worry too much about with Randomness is woods and the occasional river.

With the paper scissors rock thing, an ideal list for non top-tier armies covers two of those three options. My Beastmen run Magic and big units. I feel I could take on most lists and have at least a fun game out of it.

I think that people think that Magic is too overpowered, I think it might be the other way the dispel phase is underpowered for most armies.
3 replies · active 711 weeks ago
And given how much bull drek was eliminated from the game by allowing pre-measuring, I'm all for this change to the game. I hated how frequently whole weekends would be lost over arguing about a few inches during one phase of the game...
A good thing would have been to ensure that the charge range could not fall under the unit's M characteristic. That way, slower units still get an opportunity to charge, while high M units do not risk failing a charge on a low roll.
With 2d6, you get almost as consistent a bellcurve as you can with dice; 7" is only slightly less than double the normal movement of a Man. But, sometimes the gods of war are against you, roll a snake eyes, and your bannerbearer breaks his ankle in a gopher hole...

I'd rather have the occassional unlucky roll, than the ever-present arguments of yesteryear.
Problem I have with the game is say you're playing against someone with a level 4 wizard. You of course, have your own level 4 wizard. His wizard walks up, pops a power scroll, and your Wizard is Dwellers'd. If you deployed your wizard 1st, or his has some way of moving quickly (or both), then there is literally no defense against this, short of being higher strength. It takes skill out the equation and subs in... well, dice. >_<
1 reply · active 711 weeks ago
Shadowmancer's avatar

Shadowmancer · 711 weeks ago

power scroll got a well deserved nerf. That sort of outcome shouldn't happen if both players have an understanding of the game. The balance issue is going to get resolved as more books come out anyway.
Well, I have never considered Battle as anything but a beer and pretzel game. In my opinion, the lack of versatility of most units makes the game far shallower than it seems. No infantry block features the sheer number of choices a Tactical squad in a Rhino has.

Think about it twice. A Tactical squad can either:
-stand still and charge
-stand still and fire both its special and heavy weapons from the top hatch
-move 6' and fire its special weapon from the hatch
-move 12' and pop smoke
-move 12', disembark and shoot the enemy point blank
By comparison, an infantry block can only move forward and charge. And I did not even mention Combat Tactics, Combat Squads, tank shocking, or the run move. The only thing WFB has over 40k are charge reactions.
13 replies · active 711 weeks ago
That is a two edged sword though, as "more choice" doesn't always equate "more tactics". Sometimes it means less. For example 40k has 360 degree movement and no ranks, which gives you far more movement options than WFB, but WFB players will be happy to tell you why having LESS options means you have to be much MORE tactical with how you use those options.

A good article, clearly explaining in a pretty straightforward way the current issues facing Fantasy players. Me likey.
Claiming that 'more choices always makes a game deeper' is indeed a fallacy when one of said choices clearly supersedes the others, but this is not the case in 40k. As an example, depending on the mission and the opponent, a same 40k army could play entirely differently. A Space Marine player will hold back, stand his ground, and shoot if he faces, say, Orks or Tyranids, but will on the contrary try to engage an IG gunline as soon as possible. Fantasy armies are much, much more predictable.

Moreover, I think it is actually wrong to consider that Fantasy's movement phase is somehow more tactical. Sure, it won't forgive poor positioning, but then, so does inadvertently getting in Melta or charge range. And individual model placing matters a lot in 40k's assault phase.
Talonwinter's avatar

Talonwinter · 711 weeks ago

Your logic does make since. A SM play does the same thing Sea Guard. Both units can stay put and shoot, advance like crazy to fight in hand to hand.

Having a rino is not tatical, it is hidding in a little box. In 40k play tyanids or tau if you want tactical.

The rules you list are for SM for the most part.
Combat tatics is a SM thing, over powered by the new FAQ and is not part of every army.
Combat sqauds once agian a SMish only rule. If you where only fighting SM this would be a deployment strat. In fantasy you play with what you have for units. Like every other Non SM army in 40k.
The run phaze = the march in fantasy.

Tank shocking..... thier are no tanks in fantasy. But thier are impact hits from diffrent units. Also monsters with after combat effects, thunderstop and the like. All add thought on tatics in how to deal with them.
Talonwinter's avatar

Talonwinter · 711 weeks ago

I play wood elves in 7th and 8th. In th they where like playing 40k. In 8th they still are one of the hardest armys to master. It take a lot more tatic to win with them in fantasy then with any Sm army.

The movement phaze in both games can win or lose it for you. In Fantasy you are forced to look ahead a couple of turns to see what can counter charge you if you get held up in combat. Dealing with a magic phaze adds to the tactic issues.

In 40k this is not the case most times. I have very rarly seen combat go more then one full game turn.
Sorry, but being able to position and use one's transport to its full extent is usually what distinguishes a good 40k player from a scrub. Transports are far more than mere metal hiding boxes. Knowing where and when to disembark remains a key skill in 5th Edition - the average scrub rushes his Powerfist-toting Tactical Marines forward and wonder why he lost.

I also fail to see how Tau are somehow more 'tactical'. Tyranids, yeah, I could see why. But Tau? Playing a Vanilla SM army is an exercise in assessing the right target priorities. There's a reason scrubs complain about Vanilla Marines being underpowered while praising Daemons, Orks, and CSM. You can't simply run your Tactical squads forward and club the opposing seal to death. Moreover, being weaker does not necessarily make an army more tactical. Less forgiving, perhaps.

Space Marines may have their own special rules (then, so do most armies), but the most competitive armies share the same basis: versatile units who synergize well with their transport. Again, this makes the game far less predictable, which is my main grip with Fantasy as it is.
Talonwinter's avatar

Talonwinter · 711 weeks ago

the most competitive armies share the same basis: versatile units who synergize well with their transport. Again, this makes the game far less predictable, which is my main grip with Fantasy as it is.

This is my point. I see transport after transport in 40k. I can tell what going to happen and when most of the time. It dosen't matter which SM army it is. the patters are the same. If it is a objective game or kill points the pater differs only a little.
IG prefures to never get out of the box, for the most part.

Tau is a army that you have to think realy carfully in play. One mistake and it is over most of the time. it requires a hight level of skill to play Tau and win. The can be a brutal army to play with or vs. Tactic wise they have a even harder time as everyone want to be in combat with them. They suck at it, but they can attack when need be.

Tyranids tacticly are diffrent just because of the lack of transports. Kirby and ofher have talked about their str and weakness at legth.
But Tau are as predictable as it gets. Basically, the entire army rely on castling and delaying, but will still get screwed if it gets mediocre rolls.

And while I do agree that at a high level of play, transport tactics tend to be predictable, the average player simply fail to grasp these at all. 40k is indeed more predictable in its army builds, but tend to be far more versatile in terms of gameplay, as missions and opponents can entirely change the way an army plays. The fact that static gunlines can exist and win consistently in Battle is a testimony to this flaw.
Talonwinter's avatar

Talonwinter · 711 weeks ago

In Both games have thier areas that are predictable. Fantasy for me has been moe unpredictable. They armys i face are for the most part vastly diffirent. The new armys are well balanced with a good mix of troops. Only new players and WoC players rush forward without thinking.

My main gripe in 40k is the lack of diffrent army play styles. SM play like SM no mater if the are gray knights, Wolves, BA or VA SM. Razor spam is razor spam no mater how you play it. IG tank lot is the same over and over agian. Of the 2 systems I say at tournament 40k is the most predicitable of the two systems.
Apples and oranges. 40k is closer to what some military theorists call 3rd generation warfare where you have highly maneuverable elements, whereas Fantasy is closer to 1st generation warfare with ranked up units of soldiers. You're talking about two completely different styles of warfare.
And yet fantasy is a game that rewards good tactics - far more so than 40k.

In a game of 40k, if you roll consistantly below average for the entire game - something I do with appalling frequency - you will lose (unless the same thing is happening to your opponent). Good tactics, manouvering and army selection can minimise the damage, but will ultimately not save you.

In a game of fantasy, if you outmanouver your opponent, you can win a game even if the dice gods have personally leaned down and laid their blackest curse upon you. It is possible to defeat another unit in melee without rolling a single success - but only if you've already won the war of positioning.

I admit the this is less true of 8th than it was of 7th, but still very much applies.
And you can lose an entire Fantasy game due to a single failed Ld check. In that regard, 7th Edition was even more random than 8th, as it lacked the tools to make one's army morale reliable, yet entirely relied on combat resolution - that is, a 'Test or die' mechanism.

You can also technically win a 40k game while doing minimal damage, by delaying your enemy in an objective game - there's a reason gunlines are not viable in 40k - or taking the easy KP first. 5th Edition 40k is far more tactical than any Fanatasy Edition.
If you've lost a Fantasy game by blowing one single Ld test, that probably means that your opponent set up the battle to put you in that position. I suggest you check out Nikephoros's article that Kirby linked to (and read part one as well), he has a great discussion about this topic.
Or you simply lost your level 4 sorceror to a failed Panic test.

Not that Battle cannot be played competitively or is an entirely shallow game, mind you. But claiming that it is more tactical than 40k due to its more complex ruleset remains a common Internet fallacy.
7th ed needed comp/restrictions to be somewhat balanced for tournament play.
8th ed needs different comp/restrictions to be somewhat balanced for tournament play.
So?

FYI, the tournament I'm attending in a month use restrictions on the magic and shooting phase and different victory conditions from the standard missions.
Example related to this article: you can never cast any spell with more than 5 dice and the 6th spell of any magic lore cannot be cast with Irresistible Force.

PDF (rules in english pg 7-8): http://www.fantasiaweb.se/Gismo/Bildarkiv/org/17/...
3 replies · active 711 weeks ago
Talonwinter's avatar

Talonwinter · 711 weeks ago

Wow that is a very big game change. I never liked touraments that mess wth core rules. Nerfng the magic by limitin the dice is even stopp Irresistible force doesn't help. In fact it unbalances the game.

Magic for some races is the stong point nerfing is unfair to them. It is that same a tournys that limit unit sizes to stop Horde armys. It is a unnessary messing of the rules.
I think you haven't read Kirby's article above. You missed that the 'I-win' spells are silly and detrimental to the game? Also you seem to miss that in the restrictions above it's only the #6 spells that can't be cast by irresistible force.
´Hurrh durr, I got the double six on Dwellers and you rolled a 1 for your lvl 4, I won'

The other major problem (that Kirby miss or at least doesn't bring up in this article) is the deathstars. The tournament above addresses them with the 'max 450 points in a unit' restriction, which is a welcome change. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Talonwinter's avatar

Talonwinter · 711 weeks ago

THe big issue is that your feel you need the lvl 4 to win. If one unit lost means you lose the game... you are playing wrong. Dwealers while good is next to worth less vs most armys St4 armys it doesn't hurt all that much.. The shadow and death spells have can hurt low In. armys. I know i hated purple sun on my treekin. but it was not game changing if it went off. I could still when with the rest of the army.
I think this is one of the most level headed analysis i have seen for Warhammer Fantasy Battles 8th edition.

The big problem is that magic is too powerful. To the point that no army is ever better served taking a combat lord instead of a mage. To the point that it wins games by itself.

Then we have quite a few smaller problems - Random charge ranges , magic not scaling at all with different point sizes in games, lolrandom terrain, cavalry that is overpriced throughout all of the armybooks, dragons that are literally unfieldable within the current rules... but those are all lesser problems to the big elephant that is magic.
4 replies · active 711 weeks ago
> To the point that no army is ever better served taking a combat lord instead of a mage. To the point that it wins games by itself.

This. As a previous Warriors of Chaos player, I really liked having Lords that could bitch slap entire units in combat. Now I hamstring myself without a level 4 Tzeentch caster with trimmings. Any system that allows someone to roll 6 dice on turn 1 and win the game there and then is a broken system, regardless of point size, army composition or anything else.
Talonwinter's avatar

Talonwinter · 711 weeks ago

I will have to disagree with you on a few thing.

You don't need magic to win in the game. I play Woodelves and Brits. The Brits need one or two lvl 2 caster and a Combat lord.
They have to take cavalry :D . it is very powerful when played right. as for the rest of the armys cavalry hears a thought. How many armys are prepaired to fight it? Chaos knights have a 1+ armor a unit of 10 to 12 with a lord is down right nasty. Most army can't deal with the armor saves well. When used right as a flaning unit they will own most combats. Most large block can't deal with them alon as the have other block and units to wory about. Most armys don't field a answer to them.

Dragons have issues but i find most people run them in to a unit bythem selvess and wonder why the lose. Not playing them right is the biggest issue. Also the point level is to low to play them. right. you need at lest 3000 to make them work in an army.

The use of radom forest i like. Most people don't use the other stuff. I think they should have just made all terrian random, with the random roll for how many. The rivers and wood have been great fun.
> How many armys are prepaired to fight it? Chaos knights have a 1+ armor a unit of 10 to 12 with a lord is down right nasty. Most army can't deal with the armor saves well.

You don't need to fight it. Cavalry runs smack into a unit of 30+ infantry, kills many, loses some in return, and then find out that the infantry are stubborn due to having more ranks, and generally Ld 7-9 with a reroll from their BSB. Consequently the infantry unit will never break, and will tie up or drive off the cavalry in a few turns. Steadfast and the new step-up rules means Heavy cav either lose to static combat res and run, or spend three turns killing an infantry block, by which point the game is over. Not a good use of the 600+ pts you sank into it.

Any army that doesn't have magic or war machines that ignore saves is a badly built army. Most armies have a Level 4 with at least one spell that doesn't allow saves of any kind, and plenty of others have level 2s with things like Lore of Metal which is designed specifically to take Chaos Knights and insert their weapons where the sun shineth not. Armies without a Level 4 (yeah, right) generally have lots of Cannon/Stone Throwers/Bolt Throwers (Hi Dwarves!) which ignore your 1+ all day long. At the very least they put lots of blackpowder wounds on you giving your 40pt models a 3+ save.
Talonwinter's avatar

Talonwinter · 711 weeks ago

First off if you run a unit of calvery in to a large unit of infantry you sre not playing them right. Well Brits can handle it and you will not be Steadfast most times. A unit of 30 Chaos warriors should all so make sure you will not be steadfast. Calvery never charge large units alone.

I can't recall the lasttime i saw a Metal mage at a tournament. It is easy to say oh this counters that. it is another thing to have it in your army.

Well wood elves based around a Beast mage is very nasty. It has no War machines or mage that can hurt a lot of units. But is very good at supporting the rest of the army in killing thing. Even with life magic you still have to roll dwealers.

Dwellers cost 24 to cast at 24" that is hard even on 6 dice. It is not a easy spell to get off.

Dwarven WM are nice but agian how often do you see them. That they have one turn of shooting before they are in combat..... can we say, over run over and over.
See, if they really wanted to defeat millimetre haggling, then they should just have allowed premeasuring as a blanket option, and encouraged declarative moves.
2 replies · active 711 weeks ago
Random charge ranges dealt with two different problems:

1) Milimeter haggling. Would have been better off by allowing premeasuring

2) Not permiting slower armies to ever get the charge on faster armies when charging was way too powerful.
Yeah, I can buy point 2. It adds a level of unpredictability that players have to account for and that's useful. It's just a little TOO swingy for my liking, though in general I have fun with 8th.
Thanks for the shoutout Kirby! Glad you're enjoying this article series, more on the way.
1 reply · active 711 weeks ago
Design Company Logo's avatar

Design Company Logo · 684 weeks ago

This is one of the most incredible blogs I have read in a very long time. Your blog is great for anyone who wants to understand this subject more. Great stuff.

Post a new comment

Comments by

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...