Hello. I haven't been playing fantasy long, but I've played 40k for 5 years. While I don't think that High Elves are impossible to beat, they are ridiculously good. They have large advantages in pretty much every aspect (speed, strike first, strong infantry, magic, items, unit choices, force organization, armor [on cavalry]). It seems to me like the designers went a little overboard putting 'strengths' in this rulebook without balancing it with weaknesses. Most people point to point costs as a disadvantage, but I am not convinced. The power verse price ratio is incredible. Spearmen that strike first with 3 fighting ranks for less than 10pts. Come on.

I just wanted to vent and see if others felt the same about this matter.

I waited till I was good and tired to reply to any such post. I really don't wanna rant, or start a flame war. I will even be brief!

I feel we often get these questions when a new army is released. NO I as a starting point, I do not agree with this. I think they are fairly balanced and it is just a matter of people adjusting their tactic and get to know the new armybook. I think they have made some serious upgrades, but heck HE needed it worse than most other (yea yea, we still need Chaos Dwarfs)! I play against them very often, and I think it has some fundamental tactical goddy-packs like ASF. Maybe they could have upgraded the HE in a better way, but I don't think that they did a bad job (it really is a fantastic armybook). I hope more people will realize that GW makes pretty balanced armies.

I understand that some armies have a hard time, but then again so does every army have against some opponents...

-Hope I was okay, even though writing with my eyes closed...

I'd have to agree with Cebwj, and its not even because I play HE 0:. They have plenty of weaknesses that can be exploited. You just have to realize that some people will have a hard time adjusting their tactics to compensate for ASF and the like.

HE are still the low armored, weak (Strength and toughness), low model army that they always were. Now you don't even have to worry about full cavalry armies anymore.

So again, no I don't agree. I think that for the most part GW did a good job of making the HE more viable without full cavalry, without making them overpowered.

I'm not set in my opinion against HE since I'm a new player. I just don't see that they have any major exploitable weaknesses. It is merely their all-rounded nature that makes them ridiculous. I've played two 750pt games against them; they were fun and extremely tactical but it felt like I was fighting an uphill battle from the start (and not due to army comp).

People talk about them having bad armor, but they have access to decent armor (Lt, Hvy, shield, plus mount, barding for cav). They aren't all that expensive , points-wise either.

Not that I'm looking at this purely from a WE perspective (they are my 1st fantasy army), but WE are also a small, fast, and elite army. However, they seem completely outclassed, even heroes, except for the major difference in mobility (fast cav, skirmishers). I don't think it's right for a charging, I9 alter kindred to strike after someone with a great weapon. It makes sense to hit before a charging orc or even a human hero but not a crazy fast elf. Can you help me out by enlightening me as to how its fair and balanced for a HE mage to cast irresistably or remove other players' magic items? Those make sense fluffwise, but they just seem a little extreme. Maybe this is all my inexperience talking.

I read the GW tacticas about fighting against HE's. It suggests that WE use a one use item (HoD arrow) and wardancers (who would get owned by ASF). These are not promising suggestions. What do you suggest?

they are hard to use, its not a walk in the park. high elves still run away, are still weak and their magic isn't as good as its made out to be, they're also expensive point wise i'd say. i've been using my high elves alot recenetly and its becoming frustrating, the smallest mistake and everything seems to fall apart, then again swordmasters are amazing and they never seem to let me down, repeater bolt throwers i love them and i like spearmen too.

I'm not set in my opinion against HE since I'm a new player. I just don't see that they have any major exploitable weaknesses. It is merely their all-rounded nature that makes them ridiculous. I've played two 750pt games against them; they were fun and extremely tactical but it felt like I was fighting an uphill battle from the start (and not due to army comp).
The system is meant to be balanced about 2000 points, but WE are pretty good in small games. I think you need to review your armylist (post it in the WE armylist subforum and get some VS HE response)

People talk about them having bad armor, but they have access to decent armor (Lt, Hvy, shield, plus mount, barding for cav). They aren't all that expensive , points-wise either.
From a WE persepctive, no they have strong armour, but when you look a bit wider it isn't so. Sure the Swordmasters have heavy armour, but compared to a good ol' 3+ save for BASIC dwarf infantry (who cost less). Dragonprinces are good, but what are they to do against a cannon? a spell without armour save (they are only T3).

Not that I'm looking at this purely from a WE perspective (they are my 1st fantasy army), but WE are also a small, fast, and elite army. However, they seem completely outclassed, even heroes, except for the major difference in mobility (fast cav, skirmishers). I don't think it's right for a charging, I9 alter kindred to strike after someone with a great weapon. It makes sense to hit before a charging orc or even a human hero but not a crazy fast elf. Can you help me out by enlightening me as to how its fair and balanced for a HE mage to cast irresistably or remove other players' magic items? Those make sense fluffwise, but they just seem a little extreme. Maybe this is all my inexperience talking.
I think the ASF might have been a bad way to balance the HE (at least for the whole army), I think it is a bit off the fluff, but with balance it turned out fairly okay (even though it is VERY good against some armies (like mostly mobile armies) and not doing anything against foes like zombies.
About the refering to removing magic items, irresistably: You can cast with irresistable force too. Everyone (well except non-magic armies and TK) can! And as for the remove magic item, it isn't new, and you can dispel it. Personally I think that is a crap magic, it doesn't win games or anything, and if you have been beaten because he was lucky and destroyed a magic item it is YOUR tactics that needs to be adjusted. not the HE

I read the GW tacticas about fighting against HE's. It suggests that WE use a one use item (HoD arrow) and wardancers (who would get owned by ASF). These are not promising suggestions. What do you suggest?
HoD arrow is a good thing! Otherwise I would recommend using things that don't die when the HE hit em. Like treekin and the likes. Otherwise you can always just shoot him to pieces!
As I have mentioned several times (and I hope you take no offence) it is YOU who is in need of adjusting, not the HE. Sure ASF army-wide might be a bit over the top against some foes, but they are not unfair or broken.

Post a list in the WE armylist subforum, and mention what the WE player noramlly brings... We'll take him down in no time then!

General rule of thumb - people don't like getting pulled out of their comfort zone.

ASF forces people to do that. The simple solution is to think about it. work out new tactics, exploit their weaknesses, avoid their strengths.

Lets look at wood elves. Wood elves have A: powerful missile fire B: fast and hard hitting combat units and C: forest spirits.

The high elves have poor armour on their infantry (strongest part of the army in many ways) so pounding them with S4 bow fire just wreaks them.

the high elf units with good armour are the cavalry, who are outpaced by their wood elf counter parts (wild riders). Charge them first and kick some arse ;)

Third thing is that the only things that high elves have that can even consider taking on treemen head on are dragons. Not too hard to deal with in the long run.


:C

The high elves have poor armour on their infantry (strongest part of the army in many ways) so pounding them with S4 bow fire just wreaks them.

This is very true. Rhoaran, you mention that HE have access to good armour, but if you look at the infantry none of them have a total save greater than 5+, which is fairly poor for such expensive troops. The cavlary do have good armour, but it's still less than others such as Empire Knights who have access to full plate.



the high elf units with good armour are the cavalry, who are outpaced by their wood elf counter parts (wild riders). Charge them first and kick some arse ;)



Just before someone points out that charging them is pointless because of ASF, if you charge them then yes, they will strike first but without any lance bonuses, while you will get any spear/lance bonuses. You'll only have to deal with a few S3 attacks before hitting them back.

I think the Always strike first thing is annoying. Especially as I play lizardmen and to spend XX points on Sword of the Hornet just to be wasted when you play a HE army (im talking Tournament play here) its annoying. Apart from that though the HE always strike first against lizzies anyway (go Initiative 1 woo!). Im annoyed about the ASF even when charged, thats just stupid and turns it into a game of 40k where you can just move your guys towards the enemy as fast as possible as it doesnt matter if you get charged.

They did need a redo but ASF is just a little too OTT, I mean elves have great I anyway so why bother?

Oh and having a dragon at 1000 points takes the biscuit too.

No points costs of items in future please - GN

As I have mentioned several times (and I hope you take no offence) it is YOU who is in need of adjusting, not the HE. Sure ASF army-wide might be a bit over the top against some foes, but they are not unfair or broken.

Post a list in the WE armylist subforum, and mention what the WE player noramlly brings... We'll take him down in no time then!

My beef with HE has little to do with my ingame experience with them. My games have been fun, back-and-forth games. I played another two against HE last night (one draw and one game where he had an illegal list.

I'm not complaining because of getting beat by ASF or losing a magic item. I'm just upset that they are too powerful for no good reason.

My beef with HE has little to do with my ingame experience with them. My games have been fun, back-and-forth games. I played another two against HE last night (one draw and one game where he had an illegal list.

I'm not complaining because of getting beat by ASF or losing a magic item. I'm just upset that they are too powerful for no good reason.

You've built them up too much. They are nowhere near as powerful as you say.

As has been said before, T3 and a 5+ save isn't immensely tough. The whole army is T3!

As WE should should more than enough shooting to deal with the limited body count of the HE.

Instead of whining, you could be formulating a plan to beat them.

My beef with HE has little to do with my ingame experience with them. My games have been fun, back-and-forth games. I played another two against HE last night (one draw and one game where he had an illegal list.

I'm not complaining because of getting beat by ASF or losing a magic item. I'm just upset that they are too powerful for no good reason.
I am getting really tired of you coming back to this thread saying the same agian and again. you have no arguments and it might be time to see the light. A lot of good men (maybe some women) have posted in this thread and nobody is having the same selfrightousness about the whole 'High Elves are hard to beat'-deal. Just formulate a plan, and if you really think it is so hard, find a group to share experiences with. I am sure that some have a very hard time (including myself) adjusting to the new HE armybook, but it doesn't warrent crying "too overpowerd" just because you can't or won't do enough to figure out how to adjust!

I agree with swntzu. Start making a plan, read their book and take notes on weakness and strength. Start a thread regarding tactics VS HE.

Thank you for your responses. I will retire to quiet anonymity.

Aye i agree with you all on this matter. New HE are not unbeatable but they do take some time to adjusting tactics to defeat them. it took me three games to adjust my tactics with my O&G which consisted primarily of non fanatic gobbos(i know). as Arklite said, exploit their weakness and pound them where it hurts.

dont forget that their infatry are potential pincushions for your archers.

Thank you for your responses. I will retire to quiet anonymity.

That is exactly what I am angry about you doing. If you feel you have a problem with defeating an army then SPEAK UP, Just make it constructive instead of this. The whole point of me posting here was to get you to NOT just be quiet, but to accually DO something about your own problem.

You have been given some very good tactics here, and if they aren't enough (as said) find more information!

People talk about them having bad armor, but they have access to decent armor (Lt, Hvy, shield, plus mount, barding for cav). They aren't all that expensive , points-wise either.
From a WE persepctive, no they have strong armour, but when you look a bit wider it isn't so. Sure the Swordmasters have heavy armour, but compared to a good ol' 3+ save for BASIC dwarf infantry (who cost less). Dragonprinces are good, but what are they to do against a cannon? a spell without armour save (they are only T3).


As a dwarf player I was intrigued by this good ol' 3+ you speak of. Did I miss a special rule that gives them this save? Please explain yourself.

As a dwarf player I was intrigued by this good ol' 3+ you speak of. Did I miss a special rule that gives them this save? Please explain yourself.

I don't play dwarfs, but I assume the 3+ save comes from heavy armour (+2), shield (+1) and the +1 parry bonus for using hand weapon and shield in CC. Of course that is only in close combat against enemies to the front and if you're using the handweapon, but it's still a3+.

People talk about them having bad armor, but they have access to decent armor (Lt, Hvy, shield, plus mount, barding for cav). They aren't all that expensive , points-wise either.
From a WE persepctive, no they have strong armour, but when you look a bit wider it isn't so. Sure the Swordmasters have heavy armour, but compared to a good ol' 3+ save for BASIC dwarf infantry (who cost less). Dragonprinces are good, but what are they to do against a cannon? a spell without armour save (they are only T3).


As a dwarf player I was intrigued by this good ol' 3+ you speak of. Did I miss a special rule that gives them this save? Please explain yourself.
As already explained by now, it is the basic troopers CC save I am talking about, which is great! But do you really think it so important to voice that question here, without adding anything to the discussion? that is called off-topic, and now you made Ancalagon do it too in good faith (heck even me now, but that is just because I am evil). Instead you might have send me a PM, or even read the rulebook?
I noticed you are new, so please take some time to read the rules in the blue bar above the thread you are viewing, so that I won't have to give you anymore though-love.

cebwj, stop flaming everyone, it's good for nothing.

Back to the original post I do think the new HE have been made a little OTT in some respects. An old claim was that spears were overpriced, which was somewhat fair (although I still believe people underestimate just how good fighting in 3 ranks is) so to give them ASF would balance this a little. But to drop their cost by 2pts as well? I think they're a little rondiculous as they are now.

Swordmasters are nasty as are white lions with their stubborn but they are expensive and can be shot up so I have no beef there.

The ability to still take 4 eagles in 2k points is very good as well, a little too good I would say. GE are probably my top unit in the HE arsenal as they are like a swiss army knife, they can just do so many things. March block, charge re-direction, screen, mage/warmachine hunting, all for a mere XXpts.

But having said all that I think since dwarfs and WE, all the later army book editions have seen the armies become a lot better, every time I read a new one I'm like "wow!" so I guess I shouldn't have expected the HE to be any different.

HE players used to moan about their army being underpowered, which is a shame for two reasons:

1) It wasn't true

2) GW have taken these claims to heart and come up with an army which I do believe is a little too good in some respects (although perfectly balanced in others)

But hey, that's just the way it goes, nothing much I can do about it so when I next come up against them I'll have to give them some of the ol' Slann Mage lovin' ;)

I never collected HE and I could see (or at least think) they were underpowered. I don't think the new armies are that much better to be honest. I can still wup some HE with my trusty VC armybook. I think the HE is alot better, and as I have said before, I think it's just because it's new and people seem to be bad at finding new tactics that they seem overpowered. It's almost like people just get tactics off the internet ;o

if only we had a forum to discuss how to come up with new tactics.;Y

The highelves are rather filthy but by no means unbeatable. go after them with great weapons, hit spearmen [and ideally cavelry] in the flanks just make sure you can weather the attacks. Just kill everything with extra stregnth at range and it's not too bad.

Food for thought: Just because an army is beatable does not mean it is balanced.

Elaboration: High Elves are unbalanced. There, I said it. And it's true. Compare them to other armies and you may begin to see why. The elf statline, while not amazing, is not that bad. M5, WS 4, and infinite initiative across the board is nice. And then it gets better. To be fair, most other armies start with some goodies as well. But how many armies have shooting, magic, infantry, and monsters that are each within the three best armies? And how many armies can field two or more of those almost-bests in a single list?

You can beat High Elves, sure. But you have to try very hard to do so. They, in contrast, just have to not be stupid. If you think that's balanced, I have a bridge to sell you.

Food for thought: Just because an army is beatable does not mean it is balanced.

Elaboration: High Elves are unbalanced. There, I said it. And it's true. Compare them to other armies and you may begin to see why. The elf statline, while not amazing, is not that bad. M5, WS 4, and infinite initiative across the board is nice. And then it gets better. To be fair, most other armies start with some goodies as well. But how many armies have shooting, magic, infantry, and monsters that are each within the three best armies? And how many armies can field two or more of those almost-bests in a single list?

You can beat High Elves, sure. But you have to try very hard to do so. They, in contrast, just have to not be stupid. If you think that's balanced, I have a bridge to sell you.


Thank you. This is what I intended this post to delve into. I've knocked HE around on the field (see my sig for my record, many of the wins are against HE). But I've played games against HE that I made no mistakes per say while my opponent played without tactics or forethough and prevailed.

Getting around the flank and charging archers with dryads or wild riders should, you know, kill them...only not. With ASF, they have on more than one occasion killed enough to make my attacks ineffectual.

Khaim said it - HE just have to not be dumb. They are fun, they are fluffy, but they aren't balanced.

Food for thought: Just because an army is beatable does not mean it is balanced.
Heck no, cause all armies are beatable! If you want to be so accurate then a 10pts army can beat a 5.000pts army
Elaboration: High Elves are unbalanced. There, I said it. And it's true. Compare them to other armies and you may begin to see why. The elf statline, while not amazing, is not that bad. M5, WS 4, and infinite initiative across the board is nice.
And boy do they pay good money (pts) for it!
And then it gets better. To be fair, most other armies start with some goodies as well. But how many armies have shooting, magic, infantry, and monsters that are each within the three best armies?
Who in the name of Sigmar decides what the best is? Do you? Because you seem a tad too narrow minded to be the one to decide...
And how many armies can field two or more of those almost-bests in a single list?
How about chaos Tzeentch armies? Nice monsters and greatest combat characters with magic... Then come the damn infantry!
How about Vampire counts? They also have some of the best characters and some of the greatest infantry against most enemies (fear and outnumbering you see).
Dwarves have what is most likely the greatest shooting in the Old World and magic-proof too... While dwarves also have some VERY good (and cheap mind you) basic infantry.
Just the first three that pop'd into my head...
You can beat High Elves, sure. But you have to try very hard to do so. They, in contrast, just have to not be stupid. If you think that's balanced, I have a bridge to sell you.
Indeed you must be of profound intelligence when you resort to calling so many people's opponents stupid... Like friends or may relatives... It is however funny that the person with problems seems to be calling the people without problems (and/or their friends) stupid, is it not? So the people who made solutions (we all have problems against new enemies) must just be playing stupid people...


Thank you. This is what I intended this post to delve into. I've knocked HE around on the field (see my sig for my record, many of the wins are against HE). But I've played games against HE that I made no mistakes per say while my opponent played without tactics or forethough and prevailed.
That happens, it IS frustrating but get over it!

Getting around the flank and charging archers with dryads or wild riders should, you know, kill them...only not. With ASF, they have on more than one occasion killed enough to make my attacks ineffectual.
No it SHOULDN'T. The rules are as is, and just because it worked a year ago, doesn't mean you have any right to be SO inadaptable that you need to come here and complain without being constructive! Perhaps you should then try to attack with something else?

Khaim said it - HE just have to not be dumb. They are fun, they are fluffy, but they aren't balanced.
yea I suppose you must be right if you call people dumb if they lose... This is a perfect way to set your own ego above the rest as you must be really smart if you can beat a mediocre HE-player. Sure you are... -you must be a freaking genius!


@Stonehambey: Last I checked you were not a mod (anymore), so perhaps you could be kind enough to use the report button in the future. We don't need accuse each other for heresy of some sort openly, as it could derail the whole thread when you order people to stop doing something as subjective as flaming (for once, I think I am fairly documental when asked for specifics, and by no means come forward with more postulates than the other side of the case).

He might not be a mod anymore, but I am, and behaviour of this type is unacceptable towards anyone. Please do not let it happen again - GN

Okay guys, that's enough. Things are getting a little too heated in this thread and it's time that we all took a breather and cooled off. Let's keep things on topic and not bother with the scathing remarks. Thanks.

Katie D

Hmmm. Well it seems like this thread has gone a little off track to I will attempt to drag irt kicking and screaming into civility.

Although I may have seemed a little harsh in my previous post a while back, the thread starter is rather new to fantasy and may see certain things as "unfair" or "cheesy".

The fact of the matter is that all armies (well almost all) have strengths. For high elves, this is the oft slagged always strikes first.

Let us consider what this actually does. The major advantage of this rule is that it allows you to attack before chargers. A good example is a unit of empire swordsmen charging the front of a unit of spearmen. Assuming that the spear block is 6 wide, 3 deep and the swords are five wide, this means 18 attacks. On an average basis 9 will hit and around 5 will wound. With 4+ armour saves I don't see a huge amount of damage being done. The spearmen are still going to suffer a good number of wounds but will still get their magic 5 combat res for big blocks. This is no different to other big blocks however. Does it still look like always strikes first is beardy?

A quick run through will see the limited effect that always strikes first has.

Cavalry: charging most of the time so not much effect here. Off the charge they might be saved by always strikes first but S3 attacks are pretty bad and if you didn't break your enemy in the first round you're in trouble.

Chariots: Only applies to two crew

The only time that always strikes first comes into it's own is on elite units but most players know better than to charge into the front of a unit of white lions or swordmasters. Both are vulnerable to shooting as well.

Characters can chop up chargers but you can always challenge them.

There's also the nice bonus of your bolt thrower crews being able to defend themselves but 2 S3 attacks isn't going to do much.

In conclusion, always strikes first really only affects characters (who can be challenged) and elite units (which can be shot or avoided).

I agree with swntzu (amazing how much I do that these days). Although I do think it can be REALLY difficult to tackle even the basic spearmen (cause 15-16 attacks just REALLY hurts marauders, or zombies or whatever) with some units/armies out there.



The elite infantry is almost impossible to charge in the flank with fast cavalry and come out on top (just got 5 Dire Wolves chopped up by a 3 rank SM unit. Even 2 ranks of those nasty troops can take you below US5 (you count that in the end of combat, right?). I really think SM come into their own against VC and HoC now that they have ASF and 2 attacks each (+champion).



I find it hard even to break them by flanking with black knights if they have a decent size (ie big) SM unit. Those S5 attacks work wonders against heavy cavalry (and light cavalry is also going down, unless you buy them in bundles!). But I still don’t think they are that bad.



In my book they needed the facelift, and while ASF might be the wrong way to go, it works fairly well… All the special things that make up an army book might be better against some enemies than others, and while the Dryads don’t shine against SM anymore, or Dire Wolves to remove ranks, we will all be fine, and learn to cope.



There will always be armies we would rather face than others, but we still learn to play against the army, one way or the other.


Sidenote: I don’t think I owe anyone an apology, but I hope this post showed that I can also be a little less harsh when the need arises.

I agree with K. Drake, and also Swntzu. This had the potential to get bad the minute it hit the boards, and because maturity levels around here tend to drop faster than balls, it did get bad.
I'm going to explain things as I see it- having played HE for 8years, and also picking up Empire, Bretonnians, Vampire Counts, and WOODELVES.

High Elves WERE unbalanced in the extreme in the last edition. Our infantry was terrible, they were the same 3rank S3 T3 SV5 pi-cushions that they always were and they cost us an arm and a leg. Our archers were (and still are) about twice as expensive as everyone else's bowmen, and they couldn't hit the barn side of a broad. Our elite infantry were practically all 0-1 and cost us tons, plus we had no decent core infantry to hold the line for them.

Now what they did for us was give us better spearmen, with ASF and a few points cheaper. However, let me explain that our spears are still 1.5times more expensive than Empire spears (the next best unit). And while sure, we get the Fight In 3 Ranks, Imperial spears allow you to take additional smaller-than-legal units. Can't wait till you get to play against a guy that almost always gets a stand-and-shoot and immediate flank charge EVERYTIME you hit his spears.
Our spears are not unbalanced at all. We pay every point for that unit that you're just going to shoot to bits before we get to attack.

Alright, cavalry time. See, in the old days, we had core cavalry. Our Silverhelms were just as expensive, but had more value to us. We could get excellent heavy cavalry without it taking away from our WhiteLions, Pheonix Gaurd, and Swordmasters. Now our Silverhelms are all phased out, and we hardly take them.

Almost EVERY army that doesn't have extreme shooting or extreme numbers, has 2+ cavalry. Heavy armor, shield and barding yields a 2+ save. Bretonnian cavalry is just as fast as ours, Imperial cavalry has a 1+ save basic. VC knights cause fear, and are 'Undead'. You are actually lucky enough to have core cavalry (a unit that we pay more for, and count as special, even though the two are identical) and also have Fear causing cav.
You want to stop our cavalry? Just remember that after that initial hit, we're just a US12 group of S3 elves without a rank bonus, you're going to break us next combat. The trick is to field a bigger unit and charge us if you can. We run, just like everyone else.

Our dragons that we get in a 1,000pt army is a suicide tactic. It's aproximately half of our army, has no survivability to speak of, and is NEVER gonna make back it's points. So if you take one in 1000pts, you might as well just admit defeat. In a larger army, sure, we get more use out of them, but most armies will just smash them to bits anyway.

ASF complaints are ridiculous. We're I5. There are very few armies who have a high I. Sure, it does give a little extra punch to our greatweapons, that's where you notice it most. But actually, our swordmasters used to always hit in initiative order. The only time it takes effect is on the charge when we hit you before you hit us. Look, NEVER charge us. Our shooting is mediocre, you can knock it out easily then shoot us out of our defenseless infantry.

And don't try to tell me that i can be stupid and win. Have you ever met a stupid high elf player? Most people will tell you that High Elves are the most difficult army to grasp, because they are so frail. The army does not forgive mistakes at all. I have never gotten bored using my HE or WE. Both of them are difficult armies to master.

Careful Sarathai. The attempted defence of your army is admirable, but this is a bit too close to flaming. An edit would be appreciated - GN out

I agree with swntzu (amazing how much I do that these days). Although I do think it can be REALLY difficult to tackle even the basic spearmen (cause 15-16 attacks just REALLY hurts marauders, or zombies or whatever) with some units/armies out there.

Alright then, but using zombies in your example is a bit of a mute point, as they have always struck last anyway. I will take the marauders as the example here. A unit of 15 High Elf spearmen with full command is 160pts.

For 5pts more, I can give you a unit of 20 marauders with full command, light armour and shield. So lets have the marauders charge.

16 High elf spearmen attacks, hitting on a 4+
8 hits, wounding on a 4+
4 wounds, with a 4+ save
2 dead

4 Marauder attacks, hitting on 4's
2 hits, wounding on a 4+
1 wound, with a 5+ save
2/3 dead

So, with combat res worked out

HE, 2 ranks, standard and 2 kills = 5
Chaos, 3 ranks, standard, outnumber and maybe 1 kill = 5-6

So, for equal points, the chaos army will win/draw the combat

Now we will do it without asf and the chaos army charging:

Again, marauders charge:

6 attacks, hitting on 4's
3 hits, wounding on 4's
1.5 wounds, saving on a 5+
1 kill

High elves strike back
15 attacks back, hitting on 4's
7.5 hits, wounding on 4's
3.75 wounds, 4+ save
1.875 dead

Again, chaos would win by 1 or maybe draw, so in the end, asf has made little, to no difference against equal points units.


The elite infantry is almost impossible to charge in the flank with fast cavalry and come out on top (just got 5 Dire Wolves chopped up by a 3 rank SM unit. Even 2 ranks of those nasty troops can take you below US5 (you count that in the end of combat, right?). I really think SM come into their own against VC and HoC now that they have ASF and 2 attacks each (+champion).

I find it hard even to break them by flanking with black knights if they have a decent size (ie big) SM unit. Those S5 attacks work wonders against heavy cavalry (and light cavalry is also going down, unless you buy them in bundles!). But I still don’t think they are that bad.


Again, in the first query, you are taking a unit that is worth roughly 50-60pts, and ramming it into the side of a unit that will cost upwards of 250pts. I would be disappointed if it did really damage that unit. Yes, Swordmasters are difficult to kill now, but when you pay a premium for a unit that can be undone by one good spell, then you have to protect them with everything you have.

With the black knights, a quick tally of points would suggest that you could have a unit of 6 with full command and the banner of the barrows hitting that units flank for equalish points. Without writing all this out again, they would do 1-2 kills, where as you would do 3-5 depending on the rolls and the mounts, meaning you would win the combat, breaking them, and if not, at least holding them.

In the end, all armies need to adapt. Energy is better spent on this than typing out how beardy an army is.

ninja out

my rule of thumb in regards to new rules - people bitch because they have been removed from their comfort zone. the idea that people have to change their play style for some reason horrifies people.

"oh noes! asf! it breaks the game dynamic"

not really, as ginja has shown its only made a real difference on the elite end of the high elf troops who, lets face it, would die if you look at them the wrong way. the highelf spearmen will still get hammered by anything with equal WS or T4 (worse if its both).

got a problem with swordmasters? shoot them to death, charge them with heavy armour T4 troops, i can promise a lot of dead elves. (chaos warriors/knights, dwarf elite infantry and heavily armoured orcs are pretty ideal for this)

buck up! this "woe is me" act just irks me. People complain rather than adapting their styles to deal with the new foe. take me for example, while i play dwarves i play them as a marching steam roller, i suffer quite a lot from the new elves hitting power so i went to lengths to deal with them. my formations changed, i tweaked my runes and worked out the elven weaknesses.

now i have a solid understanding on how they operate and how to defeat each unit.

every army is capable of this.

bretonians - deploy peasant bowmen screens, archer those elves to death with those arrow storms, then mop up with those knights and smash those pansy elves, they might strike first but you still have the strongest overall cavalry in the game.

wood elves - archer the gits! play dirty, exploit the terrain to lure and ambush the high elf units, throw treemen at the nasty units, odds are it will hold long enough to get some wardancers in with their own asf attacks and finish the job.

chaos - thump them! you have the armour, the speed and the toughness to give those elves a right kicking. not to mention magic to rival the elves in the form of tzeentch.

empire - attack the elven weaknesses, low numbers and frailty. make use of that infamous shooting using outriders, hand gunners and artillery to punch holes in those puny elves as they advance then rush in with your troops and detachments.

orcs - a little harder here, but with those kinds of numbers and a good presence of fanatics/squigs/spearchukkas you can be sure to make those elves suffer every step.

beasts - again a hard army to do it, but not impossible. much like the wood elves the ideal is to play dirty. elves hate monsters so throw in some mino's, maybe a shaggoth if you fancy a laugh. the odd slanneshi character with asf could cause some havic while he's at it too.

undead - you've not exactly lost anything to asf and you happen to have the tarpits ideal for pinning the elves long enough to flank charge them with chariots/black knights

dark elves - CHARIOTS! they may have stupidity but nothing teaches high elves whatfor better than a nice big scad of impact hits. besides, they're small units make chariot warfare an ideal option, those impact hits wound on 2's and don't let those elite elves get saves after all ;)

ogres - impact hits and leadbelchers, need i say more?

all armies have options for beating the elves, you have to occasionally drift from the norm but that’s one of the charms of warhammer. while it is often VERY cheesy on paper with a bit of thought you can kick in any army with dramatic results and cackle with glee as your opponent calls you cheesy ;Y

sit back, stop complaining and start thinking. Gw won’t change the rules back so live with it, learn from it then exploit it. Besides… high elves are full of it, they need taken down a peg fairly often ;)

So there- feel good about yourself- you're probably losing because you haven't gotten the hang of the army. Of course, if all you do is come into OTHER ARMY'S threads and complain about it, you probably never will.

I'm sorry I came into the HE threads with a seemingly accusitory post. My idea of balanced is obviously different than others especially since I'm new to this game and carry the residue of 40k experience. If I stepped on people's toes, I appologize. As for my not adding constructively to the argument. It seemed to me that people didn't understand what I was saying so I quit trying and started defending myself. I'll do better in the future.

The problem I see with ASF is that it really did not fix anything. It made many of their units more expensive because of it. It just essentially made HE better against armies they were already good against, and worse against armies they were already bad against.

I see too many HE players at tournaments that think ASF should be a cure-all. It isn't, it helps out but you still have to make a balanced list and use tactics. I see way too many lists that use nothing but specialised infantry units with no real support.

High Elves are a great army, but if the player handicaps themself by taking an inflexible list then is it a fault of the list that they don't win? Or their design and use of the list?

I have never seen and "unbeatable" list or an army that can't win. Some match-ups will be a bit skewed but a balanced army has the best chance of beating the odds.

I don't see HE's are "overpowered" in the grand scheme of things, but some armies will suffer more to ASF than others.

Thats the problem I see too. The old high elves attracted people who tended to be great tacticians. The new book has a bunch of high elf players that are just sloppy. The problem is sometimes it doesn't matter if they are sloppy or not and they still win anyway. It can be true with any army, but it is especially true with the new high elves. I always have thought of the high elves as being the "elite" army that old experienced players use because they require a lot of finesse and skill. I'd like to know what some of those old players think about the new influx of sloppy high elf generals.

ugh- new players? They are very irritating. In my area it's even worse because because they are almost all coming from 40k, wich is so simple that they hit the boards looking for the most powerful army and then the most powerful list and expect to take all comers. ASF is a tarpit for those guys.
Most of the new players are running the 'noob-combo' (to coin a halo term) because they all use the same list! 21spears 10archers, two mages, and then lots of RBTs and elite infantry, 2 units of cavalry (for flanking of course). That list is crap. It might work, sure, but it's no fun at all. Everytime a list gets redone you get an influx of new players- eventually they get stripped off and you're left with a hard core of dedicated people.

And yeah- the old book did favor a slightly more tactical approach, since the new book is falling into the familiar category of 'run and hack' that killed 40k and is infiltrating WHFB. Now our *typical* tactic is to line up our infantry and march like hell across the board- just like alot of other armies. The only tactical difference is what we do when we get there.

Rhoaran- you quoted the harshest part of what i said. I know I can be mean at times, I apologize. It's just that sometimes it takes a good shaking-down to get people to come to their senses. Like I said- I am willing to help you, don't get discouraged. There are alot of good people around here that'll hook you up with just about anything you need info-wise. :drinking:

At the risk of driving us back off-topic, just wait until the kicking and screaming really starts with Vampire Counts. That'll make the HE debate seem puny.

At the risk of driving us back off-topic, just wait until the kicking and screaming really starts with Vampire Counts. That'll make the HE debate seem puny.
Oh god yes, I might take a some time off from LO on that one... A lord with 5 wounds, knows 13 spells and gets an extra PD/DD for each kill... Yea but kitted out he is on the expensive side of 500pts, AND he has virtually no armour and no wardsave!
Oh god no! Just glued up the Varghulf yesterday... This is an argument for another time...
I don't if this is offtopic; but do anyone feel that we could do anything regarding the whole "kicking and screaming" for future releases? Not that people shouldn't expres their oppinion! Any ideas, or am I the only one tired of it?

Eh, people love their hobby and will tend to get steamed about things. How many Phoenix Sun fans griped when Shawn Marion went to Miami for an aging Shaquille O'Neal? They love their Suns, but they're going to gripe until they adjust.

I don't let it bother me to be honest. If people are still moaning twelve months later, then I don't want to hear it anymore.