[Rising Leviathan]

Hello there, fellow pointy ears!

Been reading a lot lately about the 8th Edition WHFB, and I see some potentially nerfs of our beloved Elves. High Elves have two very distinct special rules that makes up the army and justifies pretty high cost:

1. The ASF ability

2. The ability to take one less core unit than any other race in the game

So my question to you is, do you think an 8th Edition will ruin any of these special treats for us? For example a change in the ASF rule or a new, god forbid, force organization chart like the one in 40K.

And, if any of these happen, would you be satisfied with a rewritten book like the Dwarfs got?

Regards,

 

[LoreSeeker]

An 8th edition would be useless itself now, IMO. Not everybody got their new book, and the 7th edition has been out for what, 2 years? Too little if you ask me. Anyways for what regards changes, the only thing that comes to my mind which is in need to be changed is Silver Helms, maybe the magic items need to be touched up (weapons anyone?). Apart from that we're quite fine, I think.

Regards





EDIT: woo 200th post

 

[Rising Leviathan]

Ah, I see I made myself pretty unclear, I meant off course the whole WHFB Edition, not the specific HE rules. The rumours have been hanging around for quite some time now.

Regards,

@Congrats on 200th post! :dance:

 

[LoreSeeker]

I see, sorry I didn't catch that. Anyways I don't think they would destroy what makes the HE peculiar, hope the 8th edition, should it come out soon, will deal minor issues and basicly touch up unclear/uncertain/unbalanced aspects of the game, eg the autobreak against fear causers about which so much has been told.

 

[archonofdeath]

Why would you think that you would get a new force organization chart

The newest edition of 40k has seen its codexs set up more like Fantasy Army Books, but its force organization chart didn't change at all. So you have probably 0 worries about your chart being changed.

 

[kithre]

I'd love to see some more variety in the standard mission set-ups for Fantasy.

I'd love to see Demons ACTUALLY SUSCEPTIBEL to magical weapons and attacks - lose the "true ward save" bull....Magical weapons ought to remove the effects of a "magical aura" save

I'd also like to see a benefit for manouvre a bit more - like making units which fail a charge have a chance to become disordered and maybe suffer a -1 to SCR next turn?:

1) Make Frenzied units EVEN MORE of a liability

2) Mean that you have to be pretty certain to hit your opponent when declaring charges

I'd like to see units be able to fire ballistic weapons like bows as a "cloud" similar to LoTR - this is how bows were used in warfare, and makes archer blocks reasonably viable - maybe not in stand and shoot, but at other times. And maybe with a -2 to hit, but ignores cover? (as the shots come in over teh top..)

I'd like some weapons to be amended - halberds and spears for example ought have a bonus vs mounted models and large targets (maybe mounted units FEAR them?). Halberds maybe should be able to fight in two ranks rather than just 1 as a compromise, only when charged. And maybe spears ought to get a bonus when charged for the shieldwall, simialr to parry bonus that hand-weapons get (again - watch the Greek shieldwalls at the front of the Phalanx - pretty difficult to argue that the formation benefitted from overlapping shields etc)

Finally, I'd like to see guess-range war machine shooting weakened a little as well as maybe -1 BS on all non-guess-range war machines, as these things are not as accurate as a guy holding a bow... Guns were not that reliable in the days of push-of-pike, which is really what large elements of WHFB seeks to model. A few more devestating consequences if the guesses are wildly out would be nice. A fair rule that makes "backfield sniping" a little riskier (playing the odds at hitting a target that you can see vs one you can't), for example, if a cannonball overshoots its target unit/model then there is a % chance the powder load was too high and the gun may have burst - -1 from all future misfire effects rolls....Or even every shooting turn does some detriment to the cannon (-1W for firing?), such that the firing player may choose one turn to allow the cannon to cool etc and reduce ill effects (+1W for not firing?)...



Oh an d for 8th edition Elves..

1) Some better magical swords
2) Either Core or WS5 Silver Helms, or free Champion
3) Honours or something similar, rather than jus relying on the magic item slots (compare our Lord choices to the Empire even - they have a "Knight" honour, "Elector" honour and "ArchLector" honour for their Lord choices. Don't get me started on Vamps and Chaos!!)

 

[sorberec]

Personally for the 8th edition HE book I'd like to see ASF across the board dropped to make our points more realistic, especially for our core units that don't benefit from ASF too much (maybe have a special rule for Sword Masters and White Lions that removes penalties for using great weapons), plus it would make more sense (otherwise you have to ask the question, why the hell don't Wood Elves and Dark Elves have ASF? After all, they're the same race as the High Elves).

I've no problem with GW changing our minimum core requirement as long as we have decent core to take - at the moment our core just isn't good enough/cheap enough to want to take more than the minimum requirement.

What we desperately need is something to deal with the hordes of terror-casuing monsters all the newer books seem to be able to take (and in multiples in the case of Lizardmen). This is especially key at below 2000 points where we can't even field a dragon (unless you want to cripple your army selection by taking a Dragon Mage)

 

[kithre]

Given that High Elves are expert monster hunters (enough practice - seas off Cothique and the mountains of the Annulli) mayhaps some form of bonus vs tough/nasty critters is enough rather than teh blanket ASF? I'd say only Swordmasters should have ASF TBH...

 

[LoreSeeker]

I think that not every single elf is a skilled monster hunter. The only unit I clearly recognize as such is WL, with Shadow Warriors on a second place and perhaps Reavers after those. It wouldn't make much sense, IMO, if a Mage or a simple citizen who is fighting because of the levy knew exactly where to thrust in order to make as much damage as the creature's body allows to. Moreover, a bonus against said monsters (could we consider as a monster anything with a 40mm or more base?) wouldn't absolutely be enough of a replacement for ASF. Correct me if I am wrong, but there's nothing except for OK which usually fields many big-based models and some armies almost do not have them.
In my opinion the current HE rules are quite fine, they'd only need to be touched up: Silver Helms, magical items. But here I'm repeating myself.

My personal opinion, anyways.

 

[Rork]

You're jumping the gun a bit here, aren't you? We haven't even got 8th ed yet, and a new HE book is likely to be 2-3 years after that. Maybe ASF will disappear, maybe it won't - It's a candidate for change, though. Ultimately it all depends on what 8th ed actually brings in (or not).

1) Make Frenzied units EVEN MORE of a liability

Errr...why? Frenzy is difficult enough to use as it is.

 

[stratovarion]

I think HE will get hurt by 8th Ed.

Our advantages:
ASF:
A new edition of WHFB is going to change the Meta of the game. The current is towards big monsters and flyers, generally manouverable stuff (of which we have lots of good stuff). In 8th they are likely to switch towards blocks of infantry. Most of the suggestions of rule changes that would make this possible involve ideas such as rear ranks being able to attack (only hitting on 6s) or other such plots. This would SEVERELY get rid of the advantages of ASF and open up our supple Elven bodies to a lot of pain.

Extra Special/Rare slots:
The above changes will mean that people will actually WANT to take more core (Spearmen will be a viable choice) and so our 2 min core advantage will be reduced. Its also fairly certain that Cavalry and elite troops will be made less impressive.

Great Eagles:
Probably the MOST STUPID current rule - March Blocking will DEFINATELY take a rewrite (probably something along the lines of not being able to march block under unit strength 5 or something...). As we probably have the best point for point march blockers in the game this will be a big hit for us.

Shadow Warriors:
Will still be rubbish, thought it was worth pointing that out.

These are my thoughts for today.

 

[Rising Leviathan]

You're jumping the gun a bit here, aren't you? We haven't even got 8th ed yet, and a new HE book is likely to be 2-3 years after that. Maybe ASF will disappear, maybe it won't - It's a candidate for change, though. Ultimately it all depends on what 8th ed actually brings in (or not).



Errr...why? Frenzy is difficult enough to use as it is.

Once again, to clarify,

I meant how the 8th edition of WHFB, due next year following the rumours, will change some of the rules that make the High Elves, or other armies, what they are.

I'm NOT speculating on how the 8th Edition HE Army Book will be.

Sorry about the misleading title,

Regards,

 

[CaptainSarathai]

High Elves will be largely unharmed. In fact, they'll probably become MORE viable next edition than they are now. Why?

What's our big advantage right now?
ASF

What is the most likely change to ASF?
making it follow the FAQs they've released

What is the second most likely change to ASF?
making it only work on the turn that the enemy charges
- we already have Ini5, so this actually helps us against lowI ASF units

What are they most likely to change in the entire New Rule Book?
Fear/Terror
-we don't have it, or any ability relating to it. Nerfing it helps us.
Single Die Miscasts
-we don't have any spells that we can cast on 1 dice. Nerfing this helps us also.
US5 March Blocking
-it's actually more efficient for us to take 2 RBTs anyways, so who cares if the eagles tank?

Wow, if I didn't play Vampire Counts, I'd be hoping that 8th ed would get here even sooner!

 

[Digger]

"What are they most likely to change in the entire New Rule Book?
Fear/Terror"

if it makes you feel any better, my army fears all stinky pointy-ears

my main worry when i face high elves is the AsF for all. if that doesnt change, i wouldnt be too worried for the high elves.

 

[Marcus Piraticus]

ASF:
A new edition of WHFB is going to change the Meta of the game. The current is towards big monsters and flyers, generally manouverable stuff (of which we have lots of good stuff). In 8th they are likely to switch towards blocks of infantry. Most of the suggestions of rule changes that would make this possible involve ideas such as rear ranks being able to attack (only hitting on 6s) or other such plots. This would SEVERELY get rid of the advantages of ASF and open up our supple Elven bodies to a lot of pain.

I'm more concerned with a bigger focus on masses, my High Elves can't cope with cheap and large blocks of enemy units.

 

[CaptainSarathai]

I doubt that we'd see a shift towards masses. It would make the game unplayable. They already have us running blocks of 20 models, and for those models who have 40mm bases, that makes a HUGE regiment on the table. They can't shift the focus to core, because the unit restrictions are posted in the armybooks. They could change the focus to ranks, but that's doubtful, and they could change the ranks to 6, but that's also doubtful.

How they would switch to blocks of infantry is beyond me. Infantry blocks already have the rules for Ranks, Unit Strength, Outnumber, and the sheer fact that they are walking pincushions of ablative wounds. I'd like to know how they're going to make infantry more powerful?? Giving the rear rank a chance to attack has already been done: if you charge from behind, they attack you just like normal. Letting added ranks attack to the front would horribly nerf spears.
If anything, I think that we'll see a shift AWAY from infantry blocks. Almost every army released to date focuses on blocks of infantry, and hardly pays attention to cavalry. I would expect GW to look to their wallets and unreleased armybooks (Brets foremost) and decide that Cavalry regiments need a boost of sorts. This would severely change the metagame, and send people rushing to purchase armies with excellent cavalry- armies like the unreleased Bretonians, Tomb Kings, and Wood Elves.
If that shift occurs, I'll be jumping for joy: my entire High Elf army is built around cavalry, and I don't mind taking 2 regiments of minimalized archers. We have some of the best cavalry in the game, and they're constantly overlooked in favor of elite infantry.

 

[Marcus Piraticus]

I'd like to know how they're going to make infantry more powerful?

My desire would be to see the return of "leaping around rule". Wouldn't make such a big impact, but I think my elites could really make use of such rule.

 

[CaptainSarathai]

Are referencing the rule that used to allow a victorious regiment to remove it's rear rank and snake it onto an enemy's flank?

I agree that it would at least be an interesting rule to see return. I remember having access to it but never using it. It cost you a rank bonus, but didn't negate enemy ranks, and if you lost combat they had to return to the rear. I think it could come back, but they will likely keep it out in order to streamline the rules, that seems to be how GW's moving lately.

If that rule DID return, it would actually HELP us as highelves. With ASF, we'd still strike first from our flank, and it would just open up more of our models to attack. I'd never remove a complete rear rank (my Sword Masters and Lions don't even have a rear rank) but I'd be more than willing to let an enemy slip around to attack the flank of one of my blocks. I just get an additional few ASF attacks, take a few more incoming attacks, and I don't lose any of my ranks- but you do.

 

[Digger]

i remember having trouble charging units when everyone was leaping around allover the place. that rule was just too damn realistic xD
good riddance

 

[Marcus Piraticus]

Are referencing the rule that used to allow a victorious regiment to remove it's rear rank and snake it onto an enemy's flank?

Yeah, I also didn't use it much when I had the chance. But armies were a bit different in the past, I think the newer armies could use it a bit more.

I'd also like to see changes to Parry rule, currently it's rather very cheap way to create rather durable static unit. I make use of such rule, though I kinda question the usefulness of having a spear. Extra attacks against more durable unit, seeing also others at play, they too opt to try, to pin the enemy unit and use flanking units to strip the pined unit of its rank bonus... Probably this won't be changed but I'd like to see more aggressive direction of gaming.