Logo
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:30 pm



Reply to topic  [ 101 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
The Cauldron: What does it really bring? 
Author Message
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8560
Location: Hag Graef
Here is what Warhammer-Empire outstanding rule specialist says on the issue of COB rerolling RBT's wounding rolls (AB p.47).

It concerns "friendly models with Murderous Prowess special rule and situated in units within 6 "of the COB."
The RBT is not a single model, but a single unit consisting of several models - 1 war machine and 2 crew. Only the crew has the MP special rule.

If a single look at the war machine would not be enough to convince you that the unit consists of several models, it is spelled out in BRB p. 108:

"A war machine unit comprises the machine itself, plus its crew. As the crew aren't really a combat unit, per se, we ignore them for most gaming purposes, treating the war machine itself as the extent of the unit. When the war machine suffers a wound, remove a crew model."

The fact that you can ignore the crew for most gaming purposes does not mean you can ignore them for all gaming purposes - like SoK. Nor that they would not be models - as proven by the second sentence.
Note that War Machines are never said to be or to count as single models.

So SoK good for spells and BS shooting, but not for RBTs.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:23 pm
Profile
Assassin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:53 am
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
While I agree with the conclusion (for other reasons (RAI-reasons first and foremost - I wouldn't grant SoK to spells and BS shooting either, but like I said, this is RAI and thus no real argument)), his expertly crafted argument is invalid:

He claims: "The fact that you can ignore the crew for most gaming purposes does not mean you can ignore them for all gaming purposes - like SoK." - Okay, I claim: "The fact that you can ignore the crew for most gaming purposes does not mean you can ignore them for all gaming purposes - but for SoK, you can." - see what i did? He's treading into reading the rule writer's intention, which just doesn't work - or else there would be no issue of RAI/RAW ever - but there are.

The only purpose for the crew models to be used that the BRB explicitly states is as wound markers (I'd quote it directly, but don't want to come up with the German reading since it doesn't even use the word "model" in the place the English book seems to be using it...). All other purposes are inferred and by no means "proven" or w/e.


Tue Oct 08, 2013 7:20 pm
Profile
Highborn
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:55 pm
Posts: 647
Location: Sweden
Trax wrote:
While I agree with the conclusion (for other reasons (RAI-reasons first and foremost - I wouldn't grant SoK to spells and BS shooting either, but like I said, this is RAI and thus no real argument)), his expertly crafted argument is invalid:

He claims: "The fact that you can ignore the crew for most gaming purposes does not mean you can ignore them for all gaming purposes - like SoK." - Okay, I claim: "The fact that you can ignore the crew for most gaming purposes does not mean you can ignore them for all gaming purposes - but for SoK, you can." - see what i did? He's treading into reading the rule writer's intention, which just doesn't work - or else there would be no issue of RAI/RAW ever - but there are.

The only purpose for the crew models to be used that the BRB explicitly states is as wound markers (I'd quote it directly, but don't want to come up with the German reading since it doesn't even use the word "model" in the place the English book seems to be using it...). All other purposes are inferred and by no means "proven" or w/e.


Could just post the german text so we can compare it :)

_________________

My Hobby Thread

Stats since I started playing again in 2013
W/L/D
Total: 16/21/1
vs. Demons: 0/2/0
vs. Dwarfs: 1/2/0
vs. Empire: 2/4/0
vs. High Elves: 0/4/0
vs. Lizardmen: 3/0/0
vs. Orcs & Goblins: 3/0/1
vs. Ogres: 1/0/0
vs. Skaven: 4/4/0
vs. Tomb Kings: 0/1/0
vs. Warriors of Chaos: 0/3/0
vs. Wood Elves: 2/1/0


Tue Oct 08, 2013 7:23 pm
Profile
Assassin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:53 am
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
Well it reads "Wenn die Kriegsmaschine einen Lebenspunkt verliert, dann entfernst du ein Mitglied der Besatzung.", reads pretty much "When the war machine suffers a wound, remove a member of the crew.", that is, the key word "model"/"Modell" is absent. Further down: "Letztlich dienen die Besatzungsmodelle lediglich dazu anzuzeigen, wie viele Lebenspunkte und Attacken die Kriegsmaschine besitzt, weshalb die Spieler sie beliebig [...] aufstellen können." - Here the word "model" (Besatzungsmodelle) comes up, but take note that it explicitly lists all gaming purposes that the crew is relevant for, which are remaining wounds and attacks.

Anything else is pure conjecture. Or even the contrary: If it's not listed here, then you can ignore the gaming purpose. For instance SoK. And way list MP with the war machine at all, if it's got no bearing.

Yeah, I know it's a stupid topic all in all (and I don't even think GW *wouldn't* write it down, if it's useless...), but it bears so much into RAI territory, that any and all rule discussion about it is bound to fail. That's all I'm trying to say here.


Tue Oct 08, 2013 7:40 pm
Profile
Highborn
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:55 pm
Posts: 647
Location: Sweden
Trax wrote:
Well it reads "Wenn die Kriegsmaschine einen Lebenspunkt verliert, dann entfernst du ein Mitglied der Besatzung.", reads pretty much "When the war machine suffers a wound, remove a member of the crew.", that is, the key word "model"/"Modell" is absent. Further down: "Letztlich dienen die Besatzungsmodelle lediglich dazu anzuzeigen, wie viele Lebenspunkte und Attacken die Kriegsmaschine besitzt, weshalb die Spieler sie beliebig [...] aufstellen können." - Here the word "model" (Besatzungsmodelle) comes up, but take note that it explicitly lists all gaming purposes that the crew is relevant for, which are remaining wounds and attacks.

Anything else is pure conjecture. Or even the contrary: If it's not listed here, then you can ignore the gaming purpose. For instance SoK. And way list MP with the war machine at all, if it's got no bearing.

Yeah, I know it's a stupid topic all in all (and I don't even think GW *wouldn't* write it down, if it's useless...), but it bears so much into RAI territory, that any and all rule discussion about it is bound to fail. That's all I'm trying to say here.


Lol life point, I find the german version to read much cuter than the english version :D

_________________

My Hobby Thread

Stats since I started playing again in 2013
W/L/D
Total: 16/21/1
vs. Demons: 0/2/0
vs. Dwarfs: 1/2/0
vs. Empire: 2/4/0
vs. High Elves: 0/4/0
vs. Lizardmen: 3/0/0
vs. Orcs & Goblins: 3/0/1
vs. Ogres: 1/0/0
vs. Skaven: 4/4/0
vs. Tomb Kings: 0/1/0
vs. Warriors of Chaos: 0/3/0
vs. Wood Elves: 2/1/0


Tue Oct 08, 2013 7:45 pm
Profile
Assassin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:53 am
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
Yeah, I've always wondered - "wound" sounds intrinsically pessimistic, like you are supposed to lose them, while the German "Lebenspunkte" seems to look out for you, saying "keep them at all costs!".

And I hade to endure complaints about "German pessimism" in the rumor thread, pah :P


Tue Oct 08, 2013 7:51 pm
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8560
Location: Hag Graef
Trax wrote:
He claims: "The fact that you can ignore the crew for most gaming purposes does not mean you can ignore them for all gaming purposes - like SoK." - Okay, I claim: "The fact that you can ignore the crew for most gaming purposes does not mean you can ignore them for all gaming purposes - but for SoK, you can." - see what i did? He's treading into reading the rule writer's intention, which just doesn't work - or else there would be no issue of RAI/RAW ever - but there are.

The only purpose for the crew models to be used that the BRB explicitly states is as wound markers (I'd quote it directly, but don't want to come up with the German reading since it doesn't even use the word "model" in the place the English book seems to be using it...). All other purposes are inferred and by no means "proven" or w/e.
What you refute in the quote is not his argument.
His argument is that:
- the crew is represented by models. [Note that this is the killing argument, to understand that crew is represented by a model.]
therefore the claim that a warmachine is made of a single model with multiple entries is simply wrong.
- in DE AB, only the crew benefit from MP special rule
- therefore, there is no way to say that the thrower model itself (not the crew) benefits from MP special rule
- therefore, Strength of Khaine does not work for the thrower model, i.e. for RBT shots.
He just added a comment "The fact that you can ignore the crew for most gaming purposes"... to tell that this comment could not be used to counter his argument.

On a side note, French translation reflects very accurately the English text.

To summarize:
- Reading left column BRB p. 108, do you read that warmachine crew is represented by crew models?
- please check p.39 that only crewmember have Murderous Prowess.
- Now, with this in mind, go ahead and read carefully what DE AB says p.47 about Strength of Khaine.
You must conclude that RBT cannot benefit from SoK's rerolls for shooting.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Tue Oct 08, 2013 9:13 pm
Profile
Assassin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:53 am
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
They are crew models, yet those crew models bear no ingame meaning besides the... two or three mentioned on p. 108. So why should the rule not be applied to the weapons shot by the crew models? Like with weapons shot by BS shooters?

The crew basically doesn't even exist in the meaning of other models in the game. They lack a position, they lack attacks, they lack wounds - it's the war machine that attacks and wounds in close combat (BRB p. 110). It even reads "split profile" like with cavalry for instance. According to your ruling (or quotation from Warhammer-Empire), the RBT wouldn't have MP in close combat, ever (nevermind the cauldron), since it is the war machine, that is in combat, not the crew which is a mere representation of the amount of wound, attacks and shows the fighting statline. The crew doesn't get pushed into contact, there is nothing besides common sense that makes you think that it's actually the crew that fights.

Of course this is totally silly, but so is thinking SoK is not working with RBT shooting whereas applying it to everything else (like BS weapons for instance). If you're okay with RBTs in combat that don't use MP or every other special rule the crew might have (ASF, Hatred... it's always only the crew that has it, not the machine), then I say okay, I accept what you're saying, but there is no way I'd be playing it this way, ever, since I very much doubt this is the way it's supposed to work - RAW it is like this, though.

So, either you buy into the misworded SoK-crap until it gets FAQ'ed or you don't (or you rejoice in the fact, that they actually meant it to be working this way), there is no "this part works, that part doesn't" without running into a whole bunch of silly stuff.


Tue Oct 08, 2013 9:45 pm
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8560
Location: Hag Graef
I suppose the confusion comes from the fact that the word "warmachine" is used to describe the unit and the main model of the unit (see first sentence of second column p.108: "warmachines have two profile, one for warmachine itself...").
Trax wrote:
They are crew models, yet those crew models bear no ingame meaning besides the... two or three mentioned on p. 108. So why should the rule not be applied to the weapons shot by the crew models? Like with weapons shot by BS shooters?

The crew basically doesn't even exist in the meaning of other models in the game. They lack a position, they lack attacks, they lack wounds - it's the war machine that attacks and wounds in close combat (BRB p. 110). It even reads "split profile" like with cavalry for instance. According to your ruling (or quotation from Warhammer-Empire), the RBT wouldn't have MP in close combat, ever (nevermind the cauldron), since it is the war machine, that is in combat, not the crew which is a mere representation of the amount of wound, attacks and shows the fighting statline. The crew doesn't get pushed into contact, there is nothing besides common sense that makes you think that it's actually the crew that fights.

Of course this is totally silly, but so is thinking SoK is not working with RBT shooting whereas applying it to everything else (like BS weapons for instance). If you're okay with RBTs in combat that don't use MP or every other special rule the crew might have (ASF, Hatred... it's always only the crew that has it, not the machine), then I say okay, I accept what you're saying, but there is no way I'd be playing it this way, ever, since I very much doubt this is the way it's supposed to work - RAW it is like this, though.

So, either you buy into the misworded SoK-crap until it gets FAQ'ed or you don't (or you rejoice in the fact, that they actually meant it to be working this way), there is no "this part works, that part doesn't" without running into a whole bunch of silly stuff.
Sorry to deceive you, but you are using invalid arguments.

"those crew models bear no ingame meaning besides the... two or three mentioned on p. 108." You cannot use that as an argument, as nothing indicates that the "two or three" list of the crewmember uses might be exclusive.
The crew basically doesn't even exist in the meaning of other models in the game. You cannot possibly deny that there are actual models which represent the crew, could you? :shock:
"the RBT wouldn't have MP in close combat" and "it's the war machine that attacks and wounds in close combat" This is obviously wrong: read the "Double Profile" paragraph p.108, it tells clearly that the servants are the ones doing the melee fight. Therefore, denying MP when shooting has no adverse consequence over MP in melee.


Anyway, the point was made as follows:
To summarize:
- Reading left column BRB p. 108, do you read that warmachine crew is represented by crew models?
- please check p.39 that only crewmember have Murderous Prowess.
- Now, with this in mind, go ahead and read carefully what DE AB says p.47 about Strength of Khaine.

If your argument is that warmachine crew would NOT be represented by crew models, then you failed to refute the point.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Wed Oct 09, 2013 5:53 am
Profile
Assassin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:53 am
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
I don't deny that there are actual models - I deny their bearings on about anything (apart from the exemptions listed).

Quote:
"the RBT wouldn't have MP in close combat" and "it's the war machine that attacks and wounds in close combat" This is obviously wrong: read the "Double Profile" paragraph p.108, it tells clearly that the servants are the ones doing the melee fight.


Let's have a look at the paragraph: "Zum Zwecke von Bewegung, Kampfgeschick, Ballistischer Fertigkeit, Stärke, Initiative, Attacken und Moralwert verwendest du stets den Profilwert der Besatzung." it's the first sentence of the paragraph, I won't translate it word by word, but it says, that for the listed profile values, you have to use the crew members values. That's it. Nothing in this paragraph "clearly tells" us, that the crew does the fighting.

On the other hand, we can read the following on p. 110. 5th paragraph, second sentence: "Wenn es an das Kämpfen geht, dann führt die Kriegsmaschine eine Anzahl von Attacken aus, die der Anzahl der überlebenden Besatzungsmitglieder entspricht, wobei deren Kampfgeschick, Stärke und Initiative verwendet wird.", look it up in English, if you may, my translation is as follows: "In close combat, the war machine attacks with a number of attacks corresponding to the number of living crew members using their WS, S and I stats."

Now please do tell, where does it say - RAW - that it is the crew that does the actual fighting - on the contrary, it is explicitly spelt out that it is the war machine that dishes out the attacks *using* the crew members (relevant) statline. (Please do quote the actual English paragraph for it may as well be possible that the German wording isn't up to snuff and I have to revoke everything I've said here. Unless this happens, my point stands.)

My point being after all: If we play the RAW game, we play it all along, or we (rather) don't and let models shooting weapons - be they RBT's or RXB's use their rules while doing so. Your argument leads to an elven crew that doesn't benefit of ASF and MP in melee. If that's your opinion on this, fine, and RAW I did even support it, but that's nothing I'd see hitting my gaming table.


Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:22 am
Profile
Highborn
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:32 am
Posts: 682
I mean, as cool as this rules mistake is, it's going away as soon as we get FAQ'd.
So, what else can we use the cauldron for?
Has anyone considered a 7 wide witches with cauldron? You're only losing 1/6 of the killing power and gaining some rank bonuses.
Also, I've seen several people excited about rerolling killing blow on execs. Against anything that killing blow actually matters, you get those rerikks anyways. However, that extra attack will go a long ways. 50% damage output increase? Yes please. I don't like the idea of putting a hag in with them as they as so flimsy.
I personally find the amount of attacks by execs vey underwhelming. And they often lose combat because they are soooo squishy.

_________________
"With hate, all things are possible." - Malus Darkblade


Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:41 am
Profile
Assassin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:53 am
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
Rerolls on Exec wounding throws sound nice, but they wound most stuff that you can Killing Blow against on 2+ anyway, and at 3+ it maxes out - that is practically not worth it. Execs are really the unit that profits the least from Strength of Khaine actually.


Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:04 am
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:37 am
Posts: 1239
Location: New Zealand
I would prefer to get the extra attack for my Exes from magic. It wont be as certain as giving them frenzy but it won't come with the negatives of frenzy either. Then again, could try both and got for 3 attacks per model...

As Trax says though, the re-roll is mostly wasted here against a large number or opponents and so a there is a point for putting it in with the Witch Elves. I wouldn't mind the 6+ ward on the Exes either but then again, magic can potentially do better. Higher toughness can be just as effective, if not more in some cases and there are a few places where that can come from now.

As this topic is about what the CoB can do and not what it cant, any opinions on putting it with the Sisters of Slaughter? It would give them a small amount of protection to help get them into combat and the extra attack will help. Hmm not really convincing myself here let alone you guys...

_________________
Want some tips on controlling those frenzied units? http://www.druchii.net/viewtopic.php?t=71791&highlight=


Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:18 am
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8560
Location: Hag Graef
"war machine" is ambiguous.
Could be the unit, could be the model.
Crew is not ambiguous.

Whenever you read in the rules "crew", you know which model & rules are going along.
Whenever you read in the rules "warmachine", it is left to interpretation.


Back to my argument,
- in the warmachine unit, only the crew has MP, the RBT strictly speaking has it not.
- the shot is made from the RBT strictly speaking (see BRB p.109, right column).

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:29 am
Profile
Highborn
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:55 pm
Posts: 647
Location: Sweden
Calisson wrote:
"war machine" is ambiguous.
Could be the unit, could be the model.
Crew is not ambiguous.

Whenever you read in the rules "crew", you know which model & rules are going along.
Whenever you read in the rules "warmachine", it is left to interpretation.


Back to my argument,
- in the warmachine unit, only the crew has MP, the RBT strictly speaking has it not.
- the shot is made from the RBT strictly speaking (see BRB p.109, right column).


Sidebar, not relevant to this particular discussion but a note when using the statement of physical models are always models when comparing it to Monsters with Handlers:

If we count all physical models on the battlefield -as- models doesn't the monsters & handlers rule start to create conflicts for that interpretation? Since the arguement that all physical models on the battlefield are models doesn't really work with Monsters that have handlers (since the rules explicitly says that the Monster is the extent of the unit).

So applying a blanket statement that if you see a physical model on the battlefield it -is- a model on the battlefield doesn't exactly work as an arguement since there are exceptions to that rule no?

The wording for Monsters and Handlers vs. Warmachines on what is considered a model is almost identical sans the "extent of the unit" which is only present in the Monsters & Handlers rule.

This is not an arguement for how we should treat the rules for SoK in regards to RBT, nor directly relevant to it, it is an arguement over the point of "all physical models you can see are models" which in some cases they might not actually be models.

I mean the same arguement could be made for doom diver "models" which technically are templates :)

_________________

My Hobby Thread

Stats since I started playing again in 2013
W/L/D
Total: 16/21/1
vs. Demons: 0/2/0
vs. Dwarfs: 1/2/0
vs. Empire: 2/4/0
vs. High Elves: 0/4/0
vs. Lizardmen: 3/0/0
vs. Orcs & Goblins: 3/0/1
vs. Ogres: 1/0/0
vs. Skaven: 4/4/0
vs. Tomb Kings: 0/1/0
vs. Warriors of Chaos: 0/3/0
vs. Wood Elves: 2/1/0


Wed Oct 09, 2013 8:00 am
Profile
Assassin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:53 am
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
Calisson wrote:
Back to my argument,
- in the warmachine unit, only the crew has MP, the RBT strictly speaking has it not.
- the shot is made from the RBT strictly speaking (see BRB p.109, right column).


I'm with you here, but since the warmachine (the RBT) doesn't have MP, the warmachine unit doesn't have MP (or ASF or Hatred) in combat, since it's the RBT that (RAW) deals the attacks strictly speaking (same with the shooting). But I don't buy it (RAI), neither for melee nor for shooting.


Wed Oct 09, 2013 8:45 am
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8560
Location: Hag Graef
Well, if everyone agrees that RBT does not get COB rerolls for shooting,
then the odds that an RBT gets in melee within 6" of a COB become so remote that it is not worth spending more time on this issue!

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Wed Oct 09, 2013 10:02 am
Profile
Assassin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:53 am
Posts: 506
Location: Germany
Well, I do hope that everybody agrees on that, but I would do so without basing it on any rules but simply on the fact that it so goddarn stupid otherwise.

I've finally received my AB copy and at least for magic and BS shooting, there is practically no evidence, that it's not working with both of them, but... no. This doesn't work with me^^


Wed Oct 09, 2013 10:43 am
Profile
Highborn
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:55 pm
Posts: 647
Location: Sweden
Made me start to think a little though, has anyone ever written a complete summary of when and how diffrent stuffs counts as models/tokens/templates and when it doesn't?

_________________

My Hobby Thread

Stats since I started playing again in 2013
W/L/D
Total: 16/21/1
vs. Demons: 0/2/0
vs. Dwarfs: 1/2/0
vs. Empire: 2/4/0
vs. High Elves: 0/4/0
vs. Lizardmen: 3/0/0
vs. Orcs & Goblins: 3/0/1
vs. Ogres: 1/0/0
vs. Skaven: 4/4/0
vs. Tomb Kings: 0/1/0
vs. Warriors of Chaos: 0/3/0
vs. Wood Elves: 2/1/0


Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:57 am
Profile
Trainee Warrior

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 5:53 am
Posts: 35
Jvh792 wrote:
I mean, as cool as this rules mistake is, it's going away as soon as we get FAQ'd.
So, what else can we use the cauldron for?
Has anyone considered a 7 wide witches with cauldron? You're only losing 1/6 of the killing power and gaining some rank bonuses.
Also, I've seen several people excited about rerolling killing blow on execs. Against anything that killing blow actually matters, you get those rerikks anyways. However, that extra attack will go a long ways. 50% damage output increase? Yes please. I don't like the idea of putting a hag in with them as they as so flimsy.
I personally find the amount of attacks by execs vey underwhelming. And they often lose combat because they are soooo squishy.


I plan on doing this as well. I also like that with a 7 wide set up you don't have to go full horde numbers wise to cut point costs. I plan to run 16-20 we with cauldron. That way I will be either 4 or 5 deep but I will spend 1/2 (or more) the point cost. Also it saves space for your battle line of combat blocks (say around 3").

_________________
The 7p theory;

previous proper planning prevents piss poor performance


Wed Oct 09, 2013 3:55 pm
Profile
Corsair

Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:24 pm
Posts: 89
Location: netherlands
How about putting the CoB in a horde of 27 crosairs ahw. they get frenzy, but not the superfrenzy the wiches get (frenzy charge test on -3), you can put a sorc in there with a dagger and dark, giving them the +1s, and u can even stab 7 of them without losing combat potential.

They end up with as4+ 6++ 3a each possible extra str.

ohh and i read posts about gaining or losing attacks in a we unit. people arguing that the couldren gives 2x3 attacks + 1x5 attacks. but dont the we on the couldren get the superfrenzy aswel? being it 2x4 and 1x5 attacks from the couldren


Wed Oct 09, 2013 5:41 pm
Profile
Highborn
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:32 am
Posts: 682
And with the 7 wide it will also be much easier to get rerolling all wounds to 2 units, one on either side. With which you can abuse the broken shooting alongside them.
Imagine 7 wide witches supported by 2 units of 20 crossbows rerolling all failed wounds. NASTY.

_________________
"With hate, all things are possible." - Malus Darkblade


Thu Oct 10, 2013 4:44 am
Profile
Trainee Warrior
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:42 am
Posts: 25
Sorry if this has been said, but I notice that the cauldron has MR1 do does that stack with the unit punishing it to give an even better wardsave versus magic? I presume it does as the cauldron has joined the unit, but I could be wrong.


Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:30 am
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend

Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 8:12 am
Posts: 1294
Location: Umeå, Sweden
Allhailthemachine wrote:
Sorry if this has been said, but I notice that the cauldron has MR1 do does that stack with the unit punishing it to give an even better wardsave versus magic? I presume it does as the cauldron has joined the unit, but I could be wrong.


It does indeed!


Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:40 am
Profile
Shade

Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 4:32 pm
Posts: 112
Location: United States
Played one game against Vampire Counts with the new Cauldron. Put it in a unit of 30 Witch Elves. Also used it to cast Fury of Khaine on a unit of 30 Execs.

Bottom line: Awesome. Went through Crypt Horrors like they were butter. You generate wounds 4 times (2 hit rolls and 2 wound rolls)! The wound re-rolls give a massive increase in damage against T5+ targets, as do the impact hits and the death hag attacks. The cauldron in the unit forced my opponent to make some tough decisions. He could allocate attacks to the cauldron, but he probably wouldn't kill it in one or even two rounds, and he would be dealing fewer wounds and thus losing even more CR. Still, he probably should have aimed at the Death Hag.

However, even if they do kill the Death Hag, you still have the wound re-rolls and 5+ ward. The Cauldron itself is very tough with T6 and 4+ ward, they will waste a lot of attacks killing it. By the time they kill it, you should already have smashed through one of their combat blocks and be chewing on a 2nd. The damage output of that unit is insane.


Mon Oct 14, 2013 1:57 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 101 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software