Where have all the Tactics gone?

Irtehdar · Post by **Irtehdar** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:42 am

This is a concern that has grown in my mind for some time whenever I look at these forums. When I started here some 20'ish months ago the forums were a goldmine of Tactics, Strategies and etc.
These days most threads I see falls into one of the following categories:
1 - Whats the most hardcore way to tool my dreadlord?
2 - How many ASF+S6+Hatred+Poison+KB attacks can I stack into my Stuborn+Terror deathstar?
3 - Whats better? (of units that shouldnt be compared to begin with because they serve completely different purposes)

To me it seems a solid part of the DE playerbase have degraded into Deathstar Madness. Where are all the discussions about how to use various elements of the army and how to combine the strenghts of each element to make a deadly force? These were the discussions that made me a solid DE general (above 50% wins in 6ed)
When I masacred opponents in 6ed people reckognised that I knew how to use the DE's. But now in 7ed when I copy-paste my exact 6ed tactics (which I learned here) and win all I hear is ''overpowered''

Some new armies such as Demons or Chaos Mortals have a rep of being overpowered. And yes if you try to Deathstar your way through them its not going to go very well every time. But these armies are not supposed to be easily beaten with Deathstars.
But the DE still have our universal strengths that we had in the old days but because we can combat some opponents with what Id honestly would call ''orc tactics'' Im worried that the treasure chest of tactics we used to use is disappearing. Furthermore Im worried that the new people that join our ranks never gets to see the true power of the DE's because they can perform well with those ''orc tactics''

PS: Im not using the term ''orc tactics'' to imply anything about greenskin players. Im using the term to describe the tactics you would expect an orc who has taken afew too many blows to the head would conjure up.

I would say that the ASF banner is only good against HE's and even then its not that great. We have the upper hand in manouvrebility against most foes and if you havent lined up for combo charges to make your opponent run after first round of combat you havent used the manouvrebility of the DE's to their full potential.

Demetrius · Post by **Demetrius** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:13 am

I somewhat agree. I believe this is because in 6th ed, Dark Elves needed to be played skillfully if you wanted even a chance of winning. However, because of the new army syndrome, this is now not true and we don't need to be half the general we had to be to win. For example, 80% of lists nowadays have Black Guard with ASF banner, which is why I refuse to use them.

Lakissov · Post by **Lakissov** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:47 am

I agree completely!

I also experienced this - taking an ASF BG unit to a local tournament, and suddenly realizing after a few preparation games that the most efficient use for them is just to move ahead at full speed and receive whatever charge comes their way. This just became so boring very soon!

I do agree that we need ASF only against Asur. And as to BG themselves, we need them only against undead and daemons (because these are good at attrition, and the only thing that DE have which is also good at attrition is BG).

What's more important, the army that we currently have does have a lot of tools for making the tactics which worked in previous edition work better now. In the department of manoeuvrability, we got core harpies; in the department of heavy hitting, we got heavy hitters which can actually hit hard and in the department of magic we got a major boost to the potential of devastation by low-level casters.

I guess, the temptation is just too big for many people to just take the hardest army lists and use them, instead of using tactics.

Rabidnid · Post by **Rabidnid** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:09 am

For melee armies yes, with them being about as tactical as WoC, due to the largely unkillable lord and the ASF BG.

Those of us who still run themed armies need a plan to succeed. I have found "word of pain" a passable substitute for the ASF banner and don't use BG, so I still need to arrange for the demise of the enemy rather than simply overwhelm them with a superior unit.

That said though the only thing really special about the BG are their 50 point banner. They would not be such an obvious choice if both Witches and Exes had the option as well. If the exes had been given the option of 25 points of gifts on the champ and a 50 point banner, they would be the favourite unit, not the BG.

No one · Post by **No one** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:19 am

I've never really learned to play with the 6th ed DE and I'm really sad I didn't, these new DE are, in some aspects, way over the top. I believe it is things like the ring of hotek, super hydras, pendant etc. etc. wich make sthat people lose interest in tactics and just try to create a list wich can by used without too much trouble.
Some might disagree with me but I think the 7th ed made DE way to easy to play, I would rather have had a new book without all the no-brainer magic items.
I'll agree with Irthedar, sadly.

Mr. anderson · Post by **Mr. anderson** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:32 am

I agree completely. I have played DE mostly in 6th Ed. and hardly ever play in 7th Ed. - this is more due to lack of opponents than anything else, but also due to me not making much of an effort to find them. Throughout 6th Ed. we had to use tactics (and that was on of the main topics on D.net ever since I joined), which has made those who are able to win with their armies good generals for the most part. Now we suddenly have a very powerful army list . The problem is we don't need to use tactics as much any more and still have an extremely efficient army.

I remember being one of those who cried cheese very loudly when I heard about ASF on the high elves, but now I wipe the table with them in almost every game I play (I've gone as far as considering to start an empire army - you know, the traditional one with lots of swordsmen, spearmen, some hadngunners and a cannon or two).

Moral of the story - we need more tactics and less deathstar. You know those slogans "92% of teenagers listen to rap. Copy this into your signature if you are part of the 8% that still listen to real music." - a slogan I hate, by the way - rap and hip hop are great styles of music if not every second word is a swearword. I like the idea of a slogan "3/4 of games are won by deathstars. Copy this into your signature if you still use real tactics to win" :lol:

I do like the emergence of the "tactics question of the week" threads a lot (even though I must confess I haven't yet contributed to them), but I think it's a step in the right direction.

HUZZAH!

Post by **Layne** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:38 am

A themed army is one that includes Executioners, right? And you don't need much of a plan, just some Harpies, and perhaps a Cauldron. If your themed army excludes Harpies you would need a plan, else you just do exactly what we've always done - bait, flee, countercharge. And now you can throw in the Mage in the Wood for perhaps 160pts, and do damage without hardly any risk.

The special thing about BG is Stubborn Ld9, ItP. Used to be it was too expensive, now it's manageable, and this is partly because near as dammit everything else got cheaper, so we can better afford it, and partly because they're now a Special choice. You'll recall they used to be in competition for one of two places with Cauldron, Hydra and RBT, and never really got a look in. Now they're in competition for four places with Witches, Exes, [both situational and difficult, though more powerful] and Cold Ones, much more powerful but Stupid, and Shades, who are more expensive though generally more useful and dangerous.

Editoclasm : and I do agree with you Irtehdar. One of the things I try to do when answering questions in the forum is to work out a way for somebody's army to work as it is, rather than tell them to purchase themselves something more deadly. I hope that helps them to think about things a bit more before asking the next question.

22over7 · Post by **22over7** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:30 am

@Irtehdar: I think this is a subject close to all of our hearts, thank you for raising it.

I stopped WFB about 15yrs ago because MtG took over for 2yrs and I have only been back in the hobby for 3 months. Me and my teenage friends all those years ago were really just playing for fun but through MtG (and possibly maturity) we began getting competitive and trying to "break" the games and look for Uber builds. That was one of the challenges and it was fun, at the time.

In those days there was no internet and usually you were the only one in your gaming group who had your army type so you had to come up with the ideas on your own. Now (just on this site alone) I am sure nearly every uber combo has been done for you. The source of challenge is and needs to be different. Self handicapping is one approach to this, I guess. A universal and properly researched tournament or more general gaming structure is another.

I can fully understand GW's power creep (if only by making things cheaper in pts terms): they sell more models and they believe, I'm sure, that everyone will want the hottest new thing, so it better be good. This is a shame, but maybe inevitable.

Master of arneim · Post by **Master of arneim** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:04 pm

Irtehdar wrote:To me it seems a solid part of the DE playerbase have degraded into Deathstar Madness.

That's a fair point. I wanted to write down a similar thread time ago, but then I ended up with the "obvious choice" discussion, just because I thought it should have been the next path after this kind of post. Going with certain lists/units/items is the easiest way to win, there is no point in negating it. I would also point the attention on the complete falling of the ancient and excellent msu tactic, concerning redirecting charges and so on. I've noticed that today in tourneys the quality and the skills of the player involved seem really low: all what the major number of players keeps doing is going cheesy (with daemons and De above all, even considering that now Vc are not so strong because the other 2 races), not relying on a single tactic. This sunday I went to a tourney where I brought a very underdog list (it was really a piece of madness) and, even having encountered 2 daemons and a vampire, I managed to win vs all 3 (not reaching the podium though), but they were lacking of any strategies over the "I park this unit here, because when I move forward I'll charge the opposite unit, defeating it". It's embarassing the problems I could give to them when moving my 2 scary units of harpies (not even 3, only 2, and without any dark rider) and I'm not the definitive master of tactica! It was ridicolous. In the end of each game I discussed on the match, talking about what should have been in my opinion the best move to do in the x turn, but sometimes my opponent didn't even understand what I was talking about!

Rabidnid · Post by **Rabidnid** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:28 pm

Master of Arneim wrote:
...I managed to win vs all 3 (not reaching the podium though), but they were lacking of any strategies over the "I park this unit here, because when I move forward I'll charge the opposite unit, defeating it". It's embarassing the problems I could give to them when moving my 2 scary units of harpies (not even 3, only 2, and without any dark rider) and I'm not the definitive master of tactica! It was ridicolous. In the end of each game I discussed on the match, talking about what should have been in my opinion the best move to do in the x turn, but sometimes my opponent didn't even understand what I was talking about!

Same thing happened to me last game. A DoC just deployed straight accross the table and moved forward. I blocked his nurgle from moving, shot at his demonetts and charged his horrors, all the while usuing magic to kill or disable units.

Having screened off my witches so they could only charge the horrors, I left the demonettes to charge an expendable spear block so I could shoot them some more, and the nurgle couldn't move because they were blocked in by harpies and could only charge off at a 45 degree angle to my army because of the redirect.

The demonettes got shot down to 3 models and the horrors lost about 17 models to ACR and SCR from the witches.

Next turn the harpies withdrew and the RXB redeplyed to redirect the charge of the nurgle so they could only catch one unit. The demonettes and horrors were wiped out and the hydra was closing in on the nurgle left rear.

The other player conceded as they was no way he could kill more than 1 RXB unit befor he was hit by the hydra and witches.

With only witches as my melee unit, i have to choose my fights carefully. Other players, even DE payers, don't understand the logic behind it and keep telling me to buy black guard. After a lot of false starts I'm starting to win regularly now, and finally have a grip of my almost all crossbow and magic army.

Ehakir · Post by **Ehakir** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:14 pm

I can imagine that it is true for a lot of players, but I have continued playing the way I did in 6th edition. Black Guard might be neat, but they have let me down. Sure, they can hold a charge and kick some ass, but I prefer a more manouvrable army where I can decide what to charge. That is: A master on manticore, 3-4 units dark riders, 2 units CoK, 5 witch elves, 5 shades, and a hydra. This is what my list in 6th included as well (ok, it were 10 witches back then), and I still need to think carefully how to position things. It wouldn't surprise me if I would win from the BG deathstar time after time.

So yes, it might be easy to take those 'wonderful' deathstars, but in the end, the tactics triumpf the units. Maybe it is true that a lot of newcomers tend not to use tactics anymore, but they will learn eventually that their BG isn't as good as they think they are.

Marauder mitch2 · Post by **Marauder mitch2** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:20 pm

I still play DE's the same as before sure i use ASF BG but they are my daemon undead policy. Deathstars are boring but people tend to be put off by them. There are 2 types of DE players at the moment.

6th Ed DE players who know the army intimitely
Band Wagoners, who use the deathstars

As a lot of people here used the old DE's most the lists seem to be balanced on the hard side. I find against regular opponents the BG never see combat so the spear blocks become more useful.

Colonel · Post by **Colonel** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:22 pm

Deathstars might win games but not tournaments, at least not ones where comp and sports are scored.

What wins tournaments around here are armies I call 'deceptively hard'. We are perfectly capable of winning without abusing all the best choices, while taking a thematic army and using solid tactics that earn you respect.

I bought a dragon and hydra when I started playing DE, and regret it, as now they are painted so well I feel bad not using them. As I get more infantry painted up I am removing more fancy tools that win games without thinking.

Dark jeebs · Post by **Dark jeebs** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:48 pm

I don't think this problem only occurs in the warhammer world but is also a continuing trend in computer strategy games as well. I think that it is because the focus of having fun playing the game has shifted to having fun winning the game. It's all about win/loss ratios and bringing in ridiculous math equations to justify taking unit A over unit B instead of choosing unit B just because you want to use it. I think 22over7 said it best

In those days there was no internet and usually you were the only one in your gaming group who had your army type so you had to come up with the ideas on your own. Now (just on this site alone) I am sure nearly every uber combo has been done for you. The source of challenge is and needs to be different.

So I ask what can we do as members of the d.net community to help refocus on the essence of the game?

Mr. anderson · Post by **Mr. anderson** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:27 pm

So I ask what can we do as members of the d.net community to help refocus on the essence of the game?

Well first thing you can do is to not use deathstars any more

If you never used them, good on you!

Commenting on army lists with deathstars will probably help as well I reckon. Oh, and you could start making armies that you think have a cool theme. I play my brother using core choices, cold one knights (I bought the models and am currently painting them... they're just too darn cool) and one hero only in less than 2000 points. It's great fun and it requires me to think. A lot. Because I have nothing that in fact can cope with 2 units of swordmasters, one unit of white lions, chariots, dragon mages and their likes, so I have to come up with combo charges, denying charges, bait/flee tactics like in the good old days.

On top of that you could use your signature to let others know you don't use deathstars and you're proud of it

HUZZAH!

Post by **Dark Alliance** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:30 pm

It never ceases to amaze me that after years of suffering with a weaker army than most, DE players here at d.net actually complain about the fact we can now hold our own against any opponent out there...

Having said that, I too agree that the tactics forum here has become lacklustre with innovation, but I think that has to do with the newness of the book, and the fact that uber combos are a by product of the game breaking Daemon book. In time I suspect this will revert back to it's former glory as the bandwaqon boys jump ship to Lizards, Skaven etc as further new books are released.

So in conclusion, if you are looking for old style tactical theory discussions why not start a topic, rather than a topic complaining about their lack of existence. Don't forget though, the game itself has changed massively since the release of the Daemon book, and it is a trend I suspect will continue.

Irtehdar · Post by **Irtehdar** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:34 pm

Okay I admit I myself have played a handful of ASF BG armies and tried a Shade Deathstar afew times. I also tried out ''All Cav'' armies for awhile... When the book came out and I wanted to get a feel for each unit in the new edition.

These days Im back to pretty much my old 6ed setup consisting more or less of 4x5 DR's, 4x5 Harpies, 3x10 RxB's, 2-3 units Shades, 2 RBT's and CoB along with caddy BSB and hunter noble. This way of dominating the movement phase and planning out 3-4 turns in advance is just the main reason I fell in love with the DE's to begin with.

Okay Ive added in a RoH for my hunter noble but thats about the most Ive done with taking in the new magic superweapons.

Its great to see theres others out there that agree that the DE's have lost some of their awesomeness due to the new mathematical awesomeness they recieved. I can only really hope that alle the new armies thats released addapts the new suite and the DE's become a bottom tier army again. Maybe that will give us back our flavour and kill off some of the Deathstar Madness. And it takes a very long time before the DE's recieve a new upgrade.

Im currently starting up a Beastmen army and putting some extra fluffy limitations to my army selection to atleast occationally walk unto the battlefield with an army people cannot yell ''cheese'' at. But Im not a rich chick. I cant afford to change to the new subpar army every time a book is released rendering my latest army a nobrainer.
I basically want the days back when I was playing 6ed and facing off against 7ed VC. Those were the glory days. And damn my VC mate recented me

PS: Mr Anderson. I took the liberty to add the signature you suggested.

Post by **Calisson** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:03 pm

Dark Alliance wrote:if you are looking for old style tactical theory discussions why not start a topic

I'll gladfully update the D.R.A.I.C.H.
So far, there are many threads about optimizing characters and units, much less about putting them together in a great army, and even less about playing the game.

I must confess I am happy with counsels about improving my army, as I cannot afford to play 10 games in order to get an idea.

I'd be delighted to learn about how to make my army work better.

I believe that MSU is not dead, although not necessarily "pure bred".

Master of arneim · Post by **Master of arneim** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:39 pm

Wait wait!

We mustn't fall in the trap that would burn our "ubercheesiest" lists. This should be about tactic, not only about lists.
What I see in the tournament contest has 2 faces:
- cheesy lists
- unbelievable ignorance about tactics

This has to be intended as like "many times focusing on the list will weaken your strategy" and not like "you play a cheesy list so you're a fool" or even worse "you play a cheesy list, so you don't need any strategy". Obviously some lists are stronger than others on paper, so that when 2 people with same skills will play together, the one with the "weaker" list should lose. But on the other side you've to consider that it is possible to win even with an uncommon and unusual set up, even only because you could be more skilled than your opponent. Surely using a "stronger" list will not increase your tactic that much, or to be more clear and all rounded, focusing on the same choices all the times will not help you in developing your gaming potential.
I'd not demonize the deathstar, but only point out that keeping using certain lists without the same interest in the tactics will not help that much.
There has to be no shame in using the asf black guard or assassins or the pendant etc.

We only have to focus more on the tactic side (even in a cheesy list there must be a valid tactic or it will not work).
I really like the posts above mine, because they show that we're asking for something more than the simply and linear "I charge, you lose I win" mode.
I'd suggest to get some great articles on our strangest items and lists, not starting (as many times happens) with the idea that this or that will not work because it's clearly under other choices. We should be open minded and free from prejudices. This will keep our tactical skill growing.

Bounce · Post by **Bounce** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:21 am

I would fully agree that the need for Tactics to win games has sharply decreased with our new book but I don't think this is really due to Deathstars unlike Vampire Counts or Demons I think are army works best with a variety of smallish deadly units backed up by underpriced magic items.

Currently the only DE Death Star that is really going around to my eye would be the shade Deathstar and that still has it's weak points and I don't think all that many people are using it really.

I think perhaps a lot of this is that old Dark Elf players who have honed their flanking, charging , magic skills to perfection now have a better book to play with so are winning by a lot more.
I would like to see how many new players have bought a Dark Elf army and then still proceeded to smash every opponent?
Unlike Vampires and Demons i think our list still requires lots of good basic tactics. Look at the predominant role played by Harpies, Shades and Dark Riders to divert and guard other units.
Yes Black Guard are perhaps simple to use but the rest of the army is fine and it is relatively easy to not have any Black Guard in your army.

Darkspear · Post by **Darkspear** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:02 am

If you ask me.

Stop all the discussion about units, items combos etc. We want tactics and not just combos.

I am not sure if any of you remember this. I believe that Marauder Mitch (is the nick correct) used to have this series of threads where we are given this scenario of a DE army vs some other army. Army lists are fixed and player are then asked to explain how they are going to beat the opposition with the best of their abilities.

I guess it is time for us to resurrect that practice. Anyone wants to volunteer his lists?

Lakissov · Post by **Lakissov** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:26 am

I guess the biggest issue is that whenever you are not improving your skills in tactics, you are letting it erode. And in order to improve you skill in tactics, you most often have to use armies that are less than powerful, and you should try different armies - not just one setup all the time. Of course, when you fo to a tournament, you can beef up the list and make it easier for yourself to win - but the regular games should avoid uber lists - simply for the purpose of improving the skill.

Post by **Layne** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:00 am

True. Occasionally in tournaments some danged rebel blows up your Deathstar, and then what are you gonna do? You need to be able to use your lesser troops properly, and to maximise difficult situations. I remember the concept of Field Problems, that used to float about.The focus was much as darkspear describes - this is what you have, this is what you're up against, what to do? Azure's Tactics Question of the Week does somewhat to bring this back, which is nice.

Tyury · Post by **Tyury** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:08 am

I agree with Bounce, I am a new player to Warhammer and DE. I have played few times now and I never won.

I love tactics becouse with the most unlikely list and odds you can still win due tactics. And knowing different tactics can help you make quik dicisions.

Post by **Dark Alliance** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:13 am

@ Cal: MSU is not dead indeed. GeOrc and I are using a purposely weakened DE MSU/MSE style hybrid in readiness for his trip to the ETC, and we are getting moderate success with it so far.

... ...

Balanced DE armies are not dead either. That is the kind of army I play with on a regular basis, and one with which I receive good results. The lists do include varying degrees of 'magic superweapons' and other combos involving the asf banner/BG and COKs. Quite why that is a problem simply amazes me...

I don't use Deathstars though.

I am quite fortunate in that I have regular access to some of the best players in the UK as well as all the races in the game. My gaming group is vast and so I don't have the problem of facing a limited number of opponents/armies which I suspect many d.net members have, and which I suspect is in part the root cause of this topic. Consequently, tactics still have to be employed to win within this level of competitive opponents.

Maybe your opponents should consider what they include in their armies if they are being beaten with an ever increasing ease, rather than the DE player feeling like they are instantly fielding a cheesey army.

Alternatively, how about discussing ways to create a balanced, redundant (remember that old topic?) army capable of meeting a lot of the current comp systems out there, whilst meeting this 'fluff' requirement, and still being competitive?