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!
Not being rude. I'm curious as to how wide people run their Warriors. I've always run my Warriors as units of 12, Six wide and two deep, but something got me thinking....
With most people running a minimum of 6 wide regiments, sometimes even wider, should we punish them for this? No one can doubt that our Warriors put out more hurt than any other unit in the game so we can happily throw away our ranks in favour of an extra 2 or 3 Warriors in base contact.
Now obviously there are Pros and Cons. The ones I see are...
An increased frontage means you'll get more attacks on the enemy but they will get more attacks on you. Surely we'd be winning combats anyway so why put our models at risk? ..........Well, we'd get more attacks on our opponents and so kill them faster, reduce their steadfast quicker and make them break faster and stop our warriors being bogged down by rubbish horde regiments........but is this worth increasing the amount of wounds our units take?
Another risk is..... What if our opponents only run models 5 wide? Elves, Empire and other defensive armies do it. Well we can simply reform and get more ranks. No reall loss in my books.
Keeping our regiments small means we can usually tackle an enemy horde with 2 units of warriors. It's a tactic I've done many a time and I've taken apart horde armies horde at a time with just a few regiments. Using their own lack of manauverability and inability to support each other. Would increasing our frontage leave us open to our own tactics? Having one wide unit of Warriors charged by 2 units of Bretonian Knights is not a pleasant thought.
So what are your thoughts?
I'm considering units of 16 Warriors. Against Horde armies I can spread out and get 2 ranks of 8 Warriors. Punnishing them for their hordeness. Or, against small elite armies I can reform or even deploy 5 or 6 wide.
I usually run my warriors 6 wide. The reason for this is, that even with our slightly larger bases (25mm) we can field 6 warriors in base to base contact against a 20mm unit which is 5 wide, which I find quite handy against those long steadfast tarpit units. Whether you run your unit 5 or 6 wide against a 20mm units doesnt really matter imo. they still get the same amount of attacks against you if they run a steadfast formation, so might aswell get those extra 2-3 attacks for beeing 6 wide.
haven't really thought about reforming to 8x2 (or 9x2 in my case as I usually run warriors 6x3) against horde formations. might actually work
just my 2 cent
Quote Lord Borak
Now now lads. This is a forum about grown men playing with toy soldiers. Lets be adults please.
yea me to, 6 wide, same reason as vanish
although i have used warriors and chosen 7wide to
14 chosen with +1 attack of the initiate roll and MoK and halberds awesome combo
i don't run in a horde army much so i guess i won't use 8 or 9 wide much cause it makes it a lot harder for moving around or not getting double charged
In most cases you can just reform a large ranked up unit (say 6x3) into an 8 frontage anyway but I was just weighing up the pro's and cons in my brain and wondered if anyone had actually tried it.
Most of the 'horde' armies around me are going for hordes. Goblins, Sekeltons, Daemons etc. So I think next time I see a horde I'll got for an 8 frontage of warriors to maximise attacks. From 8x2 Warriors with frenzy and halberds you're kicking out 32 attacks. Thats around 17 wounds on a toughness 3 regiment.
See how long they steadfast against that sort of punishment.
do you often put a character in your warriors units?
cause i do, i prefer them in my warrior unit then in my marauder unit
so do you take 1 warrior less of just put one in the back?
I also run them 6 wide, for all the reasons stated above.
I would not deploy my regiments 7-8 wide and 2 deep initially.
Just for the sake of maneuvering and positioning.
Maybe quick reform in turn one or two before the charge.
Or just reform sick wide and flex my muscles daring them to charge me!
Our superior initiative means we'll strike first most of the time, so getting the charge in is not that important.
We move our Warriors forward, so does the enemy.
Turn 2, instead charging a long distance, quick reform really wide (optimal for the opposing regiment) and move forwards maximum distance.
He now has the option of charging a meatgrinder or waiting and next turn have a meat grinder charge him.
I don't think I'll run my regiments wider from the get go.
I might start doing this, if in my local scene it would pay off.
As WoC we have to respond to our opposing armies. We have to adapt our lists to keep being to top dog in combat.
How I run my regiments has allot to do with how my opponents run them. If for me 6 wide would be overkill, I'd switch to more 5 wide regiments, and visa versa.
If I encounter allot of hordes, I would adapt my army to deal with hordes.
Right now I do not encounter many hordes, so my Hellcannon can still deal with those (or a dual charge)
I hope you understand what I tried to tell, to me it feels like allot of jibberjabber
Also the wider you go and the less ranks you have the less you are exposed to template weapons also.
How wide? Well, like a baby's ar.... wait.
A while back I tried running an MSU chaos army with nothing but 6man regiments, and it went horribly awry. I normally run my Tzeentchians at 5wide, and bump my Chosen up to 6. I go with regiments of 15 and 18, respectively, with a musician, so a quick reform can bring me up to 7x2 with either regiment (including characters).
I'm entering a tournament in 2 weeks however, and was considering going against all normal convention and fielding at least 1 horde of Warriors. 30 of them, Halberds, Shields, Banner of Rage, Full Command. Despite the heinous cost, I'm thinking about it in terms of VP denial. How anyone anticipates getting through a regiment of 30 is beyond me- aside from Lore of Metal. Even Dwellers will only kill 10 models on average, assuming I don't scroll it out of the unit. Obviously this wouldn't be as great an idea in one-off games, because people will do just that: lore of Metal.
I ran a pair of such units as my only core in playtesting, for proof of concept (one MoK instead of BoR). I was able to reform into 8x4 (uneven, but over 5 so still a rank) against Black Orcs, while the other regiment remained at Horde strength against some Gobbos. The Black Orcs was a pretty standard fight- except that I had enough ranks to leave him without Steadfast and add insult to injury. Against the Gobbos though, 50 attacks (backed by Farsight from LoH to reroll 1's for hits and wounds) resulted in an ungodly 43 kills, obliterating the unit in the first turn of combat.
For an idea of the list: 2x Horde Halberds, 2x 10 C.Knights, L1 Tz.DP, Sorc Lord of Heavens. In the tournament I'll probably break one of the Hordes into 2 regiments of 15.
@Lord Borak : how do you get 32 attacks out of an 8x2 regiment of warriors?
warriors get 1 base attack and frenzy gives them an additional. so front row= 16 atks and the second row gives 8 supporting attacks for a total of 24.
im new so maybe im misunderstanding something here. but im just wondering
Two, warriors have 2A.warriors get 1 base attack