Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
So ive seen this discussed before but with the new rules ive been wondering again.
Currently I have one of each in my army, but im wondering if i should change that.
I use one as anvil and the other as a hammer so to speak.
But if one is more optimal then the other id rather just have two of them. Of course this will largely rely on what play style you have and what armys you face. In the end im looking at a tourney setting, so assume you do not know who you are playing.
Hand Weapon and Shield:
-Cheaper (as in you dont have to pay for them)
-Better Armor Save
-Easier to Wound (by 1 usually)
-Gives an addition -2 to armor saves.
Now both of course have killing blow, which i feel is a little better for the hand weapon as the benefit of armor pen is lessened for the great weapon due to this, though of course more wounds might mean more killing blows as well.
Combat resolution is also something to look at, from the standpoint of killing power vs. survivability as both sides will almost always get to fight now.
Also always strike first from cart, vanhels or lore of light is not as useful on greatweps. I10 does nothing for them and ASF just makes them I3.
Last edited by baynexilos; July 20th, 2010 at 18:37.
Playstyles is key here. Initiative doesn't matter unless you are down to your last 2 ranks or your opponent his. I care little for the weapon skill enhancement, as I run the helm of command.
Thats true initiative does not have as great an impact versus block troops till late in the fight, but against knights and characters in units its very useful as you can usually killing blow a few for less return attacks.
The drakenhoff banner is much weaker now in my opinion as even one flaming attack negates regen for that phase. For example dwarves shoot the flaming cannon first and then hit you with their other war machines(same with brets, peasant bowmen then trebs). Most armys have access to flaming weapons too so characters who usually have higher initiative then the troops they are with can knock out regen before the rank and file go. This and you cant take regen from unstable which we now have :/
I hope when we get a rewrite its at least a little cheaper, but as things are right now its too pricy for me :/
Now, I am a little paranoided. As a vampire player I really dislike Hydras and a certain competitive lord build with regen within the same army. So I have a rod of flaming death if I think dark elves will be a major player in the field, and a balefire lance on blood knights. I don't even do it to hose units with regen, its to hose the hydra!
Dwarves are the only race with accurate flammable weapons. Skaven have the warpfire thrower. That's it I think. Now players can't choose their lores as the game starts, it is done as part of your army composition. So an empire player can't go with the lore that will help him the most each round, but with a single lore all tournament. this makes Lore of fire a rather poor choice when compared to the other powerhouse lores out there.
All very solid points, but ive seen many bretonian lists and most take the flaming attacks on bowmen, its dirt cheap and it very useful at times. The best bret player around here always does. Heck when i play wood elves I always have one unit of glade guard with a banner for flaming attacks. Lizardmen around here also usually take at least one flaming weapon in their temple guard units(on a hero of course). This and you should never find a dwarf player without them (and dwarves are looking very strong tourneywise at the moment). Demons usually have flaming attacks of some kind as well, via bloodthirster or magic. Vampire counts now can take two banners and the lance of course. High elves also have easy access to flaming attacks. There is also the breath weapons of many things that count as flaming, including the fire dragon from the lore of beasts. Even my favorite lore to play with vampires, the lore of light has flaming attacks.
Dont get me wrong i played the hell outa that banner, and i wish it was still viable, but it just doesnt seem strong enough for the points it costs. I could get more guys for the unit that has the banner for its cost then the guys it would save against a good player. I mean its 10 graveguard basically. That means i have to lose 20 guys who failed their armor in order for it be worth it(as its a 4+). And of course we cant count combat res deaths. Regen isnt that uncommon either as lore of life is one of the best lores for quite a few different armies. Bretonians and Wood elves of course take it, ive seen lizardmen take it as well. Their signature spell gives regen(up to 4+). The skaven hellpit has regen and the hydra you already mentioned. I think regen is something you have to know your going to see at some point and even if you dont, you spent very minimal points to counter a potential threat.
In the end though im more interested in styles of playing grave guard. Though i think the drakenhoff banner deathstar unit was a good strat, its looking less viable now. Though if nobody around here took flaming attacks, id def want to do it again.
Though the real descision that im trying to make, is whether i have HW and shield or great weapons. Given if you do put a regen banner on either of them, they would have better saves. I dont think that great weapons recieve more out of the save then hand weapon shield, so its kinda moot anyhow.
What about some strats for your graveguard. What circumstances do you find greatweapons to be much more useful? also some when you find them about the same or worse?
Last edited by baynexilos; July 20th, 2010 at 21:22.
On 7th edition it was much more difficult question, since initiative mattered mucu more and the hand weapon&shield bonus was much more significant. In 8th edition I think great weapons are the better option.
By the way, you can count the troops that are destroyed from CR for 2 reasons:
1) Unlike TK or Daemon, Vampire Counts units can take ward/regenerate save to prevent crumbling as the book clearly say: "No armour saves are allowed against these wound."
2) If you sucsedd on your regeneration test then you have lost one less model in that combat, and that give one less point of CR to your opponent, and that means you loose by less, and that means less models are destroyed through Combat Resolution.
1)If you were up to date, and read the Errata and FAQ, you would know that you dont use the army book for the combat res stuff anymore, we just count as unstable now. Which is in the BRB on page 78 i believe, and allows no saves of any kind allowed.
2) you cannot as those saves were already factored in. Im not going to count them twice. If this were your primary goal you would want hand weapon shield for better saves and a ward anyhow.
The real question is whether the amount you kill with great weapons is better then the armor save(and ward parry) and points reduction. Whether you need that high strength in certain situations and the saves in others.
Last edited by baynexilos; July 20th, 2010 at 22:19.
Either i'm blind, or there is nothing saying that Undead use the Unstable special rule in the FAQ. I can't find it at all. That and the rulebook says (on p84), in reference to Swarms, that Swarms that are subject to special combat result rules (such as Undead and Daemons) don't have the Unbreakable and Squish! (aka Unstable) special rules, and instead use their armies' special rules instead.
Last edited by onewhois; July 21st, 2010 at 10:49.
2) Shields VS Great weapons is more kills VS more deaths, and in that calculation you should count the CR benefits of both (you also get more CR for killing more opponents). When we discuss that banner that give us regenerate we still must count these losses twice. Let assume that both units got at least 3 ranks, and the opponent is outnumbering and have a warbanner And a BSB while we have only a BSB and we killed 6 model. now let assume the opponent is a horde of chaos marauders with great weapons and mark of khorne that rolled good and got 10 kills. That mean we lost the combat by 6 and get 5 more killed (for a total of 15). If we Had the drakenhoff banner that mean we would loose only 5 models instead of 10 so we loose th combat by only 1 and thanks to the BSB it means no further grave guards are killed (to a total of 5 dead grave guards). So even if we were unstable we still benefit from regeneration when we calculate combat resolution.
If you will test it against grail knights that charge on our unit then the difference will be even greater, since both less grave guards will crumble and even those crumble will get regeneration.
And another reason why this banner is so good:
3) Even if we assume that this banner help us get just half of the looses (and on reason 2 I showed you it saves even more) it is still much less models that you need to return with invocation of nehek so you will need only half as much castings of that spell.
I use either:
17-23 Great Weapon Grave Guard with Banner of the Barrows and a Wight King with Drakenhof Banner
19-25 Grave Guard with Screaming Banner, I may or may not put a character into this unit.
Vampire Counts are now unstable in the 1.1 FAQ so the only time you can use the regen or ward is vs your generals death but your wight king is LD9 so the unit is pretty safe from that.
The majority of the time your Grave Guard will not be facing flaming attacks and when they do you still have the option to raise the unit back so the banner is still worth the points, its not like your going to be facing an entire army of flaming attacks, though I suppose Bretonnia could do it.
The thing about Great Weapon Grave Guard is they give you a block infantry that can wound anything they come up against, regular Grave Guard can't do that.