Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Moderators: The Heralds, The Loremasters
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Figured this might be useful (or maybe I just want to fan the flames ):
Did some calculations for med-large units of SM and WL. The data indicates how many enemies one would expect to kill with each troop type for different enemy stats.
The color coding is such that green means that that amount of kills is at least 20% better than for the alternative unit and red means the opposite (i.e. the alternative unit is at least 20% better).
Plain (white) indicates comparable performance of the two units.
To me this indicates that Sword Masters are kind of wasted in larger blocks so the idea of keeping a large SM block safe with High Magic ward boosting isn't a particularly good one.
Note: updated to correct error
I am fully aware that SM will loose a lower proportion of their attacks as they take casualties but I don't think there are many situations where it's desirable for HE to grind for any length of time so i consider this advantage less significant.
I am also aware that Sword Masters will be hit less than WL by WS6 troops but these are not that common and often times will be Elf heroes with ASF that will hit easily anyway.
Did some calculations for med-large units of SM and WL. The data indicates how many enemies one would expect to kill with each troop type for different enemy stats.
The color coding is such that green means that that amount of kills is at least 20% better than for the alternative unit and red means the opposite (i.e. the alternative unit is at least 20% better).
Plain (white) indicates comparable performance of the two units.
To me this indicates that Sword Masters are kind of wasted in larger blocks so the idea of keeping a large SM block safe with High Magic ward boosting isn't a particularly good one.
Note: updated to correct error
I am fully aware that SM will loose a lower proportion of their attacks as they take casualties but I don't think there are many situations where it's desirable for HE to grind for any length of time so i consider this advantage less significant.
I am also aware that Sword Masters will be hit less than WL by WS6 troops but these are not that common and often times will be Elf heroes with ASF that will hit easily anyway.
Last edited by gaz on Sat May 24, 2014 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Green Istari
- Posts: 13847
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:26 am
- Location: Otherworld
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
For years, Hordes of Lions have been common at ETC. Sometimes with success, sometimes not. There is a lot of emphasis there on not giving up points. It is also somewhat self-contained, given the different mechanics of a team tournament.
There's a saying here in the UK. There are lies, damned lies then statistics.
(This is a joke BTW! I'm just saying presentation is everything.)
Sometimes you have to commit infantry to a grind, it's what they're good at. Also they may easily lose models before they enter combat, which favours the Swordmasters. The worst results on the table are against T7 (which is very rare) and 1+ re-rollable (which should be dealt with by artillery, magic or your own characters, it's Combined Arms). Against most things they will meet and taking into account that you will take casualties, the SM's kill more. In particular Lions struggle against infantry and if you have just one combat block (as opposed to Lions plus PG for example) this is not good.
There's a saying here in the UK. There are lies, damned lies then statistics.
(This is a joke BTW! I'm just saying presentation is everything.)
Sometimes you have to commit infantry to a grind, it's what they're good at. Also they may easily lose models before they enter combat, which favours the Swordmasters. The worst results on the table are against T7 (which is very rare) and 1+ re-rollable (which should be dealt with by artillery, magic or your own characters, it's Combined Arms). Against most things they will meet and taking into account that you will take casualties, the SM's kill more. In particular Lions struggle against infantry and if you have just one combat block (as opposed to Lions plus PG for example) this is not good.
A New Blog (Orcs and Goblins)
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
- Curu Olannon
- Vindicated Strategist
- Posts: 4929
- Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:21 am
- Location: Oslo, Norway
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Unjustified? To be honest it wasn`t meant as an attack as such, but I would very much like for people to be less stubborn and be willing to admit when they`ve made a mistake, something I also value myself. Those of you who`ve followed my topics during the past couple of years know that I have no problem with accepting that I`m wrong when presented with a solid case. The most recent example was Jimmy and Malossar pointing out a flaw in my strategy in a battle report vs OK, where I had prior to the game decided to use other flyers to protect the SD, which proved to be a faulty evaluation. Anyways, the point of it is that on the internet, there are lots of small kings of the hill. When these kings are stubborn and negative towards others, especially ones who have been successful, it creates a situation where said successful players don`t want to post on this forum. While I don`t expect everyone to believe everything I write either, multiple members have stated that this is part of the reason why the Phoenix Guard star player hasn`t participated here, which I truly think is a shame as his is a novel approach which I find very, very interesting.
I`m not saying this forum is without quality. On the contrary, I think this is the best race-specific forum there is. My example above doubles up here, the critical thinking and openness displayed by Jimmy and Malossar towards me helped remove a flaw in my game. This has happened countless times on Ulthuan and it`s the reason why I keep posting here. As for this statement:
To continue my reference with science, if someone manages to make them work I`ll be first in line for admitting I was wrong.
I`m not saying this forum is without quality. On the contrary, I think this is the best race-specific forum there is. My example above doubles up here, the critical thinking and openness displayed by Jimmy and Malossar towards me helped remove a flaw in my game. This has happened countless times on Ulthuan and it`s the reason why I keep posting here. As for this statement:
You are 100% correct. However the same can be said for any list: a list exclusively made of Spears, Archers, Silver Helms and characters have not been proven not to work. This is why I take the opposite view: what has been proven to work? As a default, anything that has not been proven is at best something with potential, or at worst something that`s been tried multiple times without success. I see the Swordmaster case as the latter, lots of people use them yet they continue to be near-extinct in tournament lists. Again, we have one example presented by Rod where they had a decent finish, but as I have elaborated on earlier I don`t think this is a good example.You don't rate Seredain's High Archmage/Swordmaster set-up based on a couple of your own games, the opinions of certain strong players and the lack of high tournament placings. But that doesn't prove it is bad or can't work, just that it's efficacy has not been established one way or the other. If he had taken it to five tournaments say and bombed every time I would start to agree with you. But well-informed opinion does not constitute proof that a concept cannot work.
To continue my reference with science, if someone manages to make them work I`ll be first in line for admitting I was wrong.
Lists haven`t been released yet (nor are they finalized I`d think). Last year Lions were hugely popular, but lots of High Elf lists performed very poorly. Also Lions are often taken because they are hard to take points from. In the ETC tournament, you only have to score 12.5BPs per game on average to get maximum team score. This means that if you can send out lots of Lions to "block" an opponent (i.e. basically deny him lots of VP, restricting his win to 8-12 for example) it can be worth it to give another army on your team a huge advantage. Because of this, the ETC team tournament is, in itself, somewhat misleading: lists that are played solely here often have little value in a single player setting. That is why I try to find applications of a list outside this tournament when arguing for its viability. What I have seen however is that for the past couple of years, the highest-scoring High Elf lists at the ETC have also had success outside of this tournament.Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think any Swordmasters made it to the ETC this year?
Retired from Warhammer. Playing Warmachine & Hordes (Cygnar).
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
-
- Green Istari
- Posts: 13847
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:26 am
- Location: Otherworld
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Fair comment, ETC lists are in general strong I feel, just a little environment-specific.
Funnily enough, Core-heavy lists were successful under the old book! With Shadow Book of course. I just feel Seredain has made a good case for the unit based on his own playing experience and a priori analysis. It is very regrettable that he hasn't posted batreps with it (due to RL issues) which I agree makes it hard to say 'this is a strong approach'. But it is worth someone finding out IMHO.
We lost Ant Spiers from this forum because he didn't like being challenged by players like Lord Anathir, who were good enough to actually critique what he was presenting. I feel this is a strength of this forum not a weakness. I've been on others where established posters are not challenged enough, with bad effects on the quality of debate. Strong players come on here and agree or disagree with what's being presented. Neither theyvnor the established posters should be afraid of standing up and defending their patch.
Funnily enough, Core-heavy lists were successful under the old book! With Shadow Book of course. I just feel Seredain has made a good case for the unit based on his own playing experience and a priori analysis. It is very regrettable that he hasn't posted batreps with it (due to RL issues) which I agree makes it hard to say 'this is a strong approach'. But it is worth someone finding out IMHO.
We lost Ant Spiers from this forum because he didn't like being challenged by players like Lord Anathir, who were good enough to actually critique what he was presenting. I feel this is a strength of this forum not a weakness. I've been on others where established posters are not challenged enough, with bad effects on the quality of debate. Strong players come on here and agree or disagree with what's being presented. Neither theyvnor the established posters should be afraid of standing up and defending their patch.
A New Blog (Orcs and Goblins)
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
True but it's also important to remember that SM are likely to loose more models before combat than WL are so that kind of evens that factor out.SpellArcher wrote:Also they may easily lose models before they enter combat, which favours the Swordmasters.
I agree about T7 however 1+ and 1+ RR are both fairly common and often times it's a hero in a unit that can't easily be sniped. It's relevant to consider performance against such models.SpellArcher wrote: The worst results on the table are against T7 (which is very rare) and 1+ re-rollable (which should be dealt with by artillery, magic or your own characters, it's Combined Arms).
I think what the table show is that SM don't really outperform WL significantly except against T3 stuff (and PG generally fair well against such units). SM are certainly not close combat gods. My point was not that WL outperform SM in close combat. My point is that SM don't outperform WL by enough in CC to compensate for their shortcomings vs missile fire. Note the above is only relevant for for larger blocks where martial prowess is likely to be in full effect. For smaller blocks, the above does not apply. However, if you're considering investing in some serious ward stacking for SM, it's probably going to be a larger block as you are structuring your army (or at least your magic phase) around making that block work. I think the math shows that the investment is not likely to pay off except against mass T3 without re-rolls (when compared to the alternative of investing in a similar sized unit of WL). That's what I take away from it anyway.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
the table is incorrect.gaz wrote:
how can WL kill a unit with rerollable AS better than without? basic logic
beside that I also find the comparison biased, WS5/WS6 or less without superduper AS/T combination where SM could have slight advantage arent uncommon, actually they are very common. regular troops of DoC, WoC, Dwarfs, great weapon wielding elven units and the majority of the core units of the races with lesser physical statistic. there are even some heroes or lords that do not have better WS than 5 or 6. not to mention what happens after return attacks in the next round or when the unit you are attacking has ASF.
and sometimes you just cant avoid that charge where you have to grind.
PS: a new to hit table in the 9th edition rulebook might change everything too.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Oops
Was a 7 where there should have been a 2.
Thanks, shall fix.
Was a 7 where there should have been a 2.
Thanks, shall fix.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
In what sense? The full range of AS, toughness and WS is represented (apart from that one error ) so you can see what they do and don't perform well against.cptcosmic wrote: beside that I also find the comparison biased
Do you just mean that I don't include columns/rows for T1-T2, WS1-WS3 or 6+ AS and no AS? Purely about compactness.
I don't deny that poorly armored, low WS stuff is out there and that SM do have an advantage against it. But there is plenty or other stuff like heavy cav and monstrous cav that are reasonably common too and there WL have a significant advantage. Point being SM aren't necessarily better in CC whereas they are definitely worse at surviving outside CC. This was largely a response to implications that they are godlike if the can just make it to CC. They are not. Their performance ranges from significantly better than WL to significantly worse depending on what they are against.
If your meta is such so that you are more concerned about killing low armor and toughness stuff in combat than you are about surviving outside of combat and threatening heavy/monstrous cav then go with SM I guess.
My opinion is that the introduction of Wood Elves to the scene has only made the meta worse for SM. Not only are WE good at killing them but other races need more ranged tools to deal with WE and those tools are also scary for SM.
Anyway, for now I'm going to stand back with my feet firmly in the "SM are usually inferior to WL and PG" camp. I'd love to be proven wrong; who doesn't want our book to have even better internal balance?
(+ I have 30ish SM gathering dust atm and they wouldn't mind some exercise)
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
I hate to repeat my self but ok, I will go more into detail, just for you...gaz wrote:In what sense? The full range of AS, toughness and WS is represented (apart from that one error ) so you can see what they do and don't perform well against.cptcosmic wrote: beside that I also find the comparison biased
1. he specificially marked differences of 20% or more but a smaller advantage is also an advantage (WS5 with up to T5 and up to 3+ AS). this includes regular troops of DoC, WoC, Dwarfs, some elven units and also some heroes and lords. anything with T3 which is the majority of the core units, humans, elven, races with lesser physical scores also some heroes and lords. all of that is very common on the table.
2. it does not take regen or ward saves into account. units with more attacks are more likely to achieve wounds against those
3. this comparison does not take return attacks into account which lowers WL output more relative to SM after a single combat phase
4. it does not take the defensive quality of WS6 into account. this again includes the very common WS5/6 troops of DoC, WoC, Dwarfs, elven units, some lords and hereos and some units with very low WS where you need a 5+ to hit. this also includes possible magical assistance (miasma, hand of glory) as it is more likely to debuff/buff to the next threeshold in the to hit table to reach 5+ to hit.
5. also it does not take into account that the SM look cool but this is up to anyones taste.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
It would be a major undertaking but I would be curious, all armies considered, to see the average number of models per armies that generally fall into each of the columns.
My bet is that the toughness 3 & 4 column coupled to 5+ to 3+ armor save rows consist in the large majority of existing troops in the warhammer unit roster.
My bet is that the toughness 3 & 4 column coupled to 5+ to 3+ armor save rows consist in the large majority of existing troops in the warhammer unit roster.
A tale of Ellyrion, cavalry army blog:
http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=749457#p749457
Painting log:
http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=816029#p816029
"We ride until the sun sets..."
http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=749457#p749457
Painting log:
http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=816029#p816029
"We ride until the sun sets..."
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Fair enough. I arbitrarily chose chose 20% but I include the numbers so you can interpret those directly. The colors are purely a visual aid that one can ignore if they wish.cptcosmic wrote: he specificially marked differences of 20% or more but a smaller advantage is also an advantage (WS5 with up to T5 and up to 3+ AS)
That's because regen/ward doesn't matter. If both WL and SM did 6 wounds to something before a 4++ save then you would expect them both to get 3 after. Higher number of attacks =/= more wounds past ward. More wounds past armor save = more wounds past ward.cptcosmic wrote: it does not take regen or ward saves into account. units with more attacks are more likely to achieve wounds against those
This is noted immediately below the table and I merely offer my opinion on on the significance of that factor.cptcosmic wrote:this comparison does not take return attacks into account which lowers WL output more relative to SM after a single combat phase
It becomes much more complicated to represent a situation where return attacks are taken into account. It's not about bias, just practicality.
This shortcoming is also noted directly below the table.cptcosmic wrote:it does not take the defensive quality of WS6 into account
I can't think of that many commonly taken units that have WS6 and don't typically have a high armor save and/or high toughness or RR. With RR, SM are only 6% less likely to be hit than WL, hardly that important.
Point being if it's WS6, it's likely to be an elf character (that will hit both WL and SM easily) or something that is very tough/armored (which are generally undesirable matchups for SM). Which WS6 troops don't fall into those categories? I'm sure there are some but I struggle to think of them.
Well any unit that's hitting SM on a 5+ will also be hitting WL on a 5+ (WS6 is no better than WS5 for that purpose).cptcosmic wrote: some units with very low WS where you need a 5+ to hit. this also includes possible magical assistance (miasma, hand of glory) as it is more likely to debuff/buff to the next threeshold in the to hit table to reach 5+ to hit
Miasma and HoG do affect SM and WL differently but I think it's fairest to compare units without magical assistance (given that it can hardly be relied upon).
On that we can agree . They are also really easy to paint, which is nice.cptcosmic wrote: also it does not take into account that the SM look cool
@ Findolfin
That would be quite an undertaking. Just noting the number of units in each book that fall into each category would probably be misleading as just because it's in the book doesn't mean it's likely to be on the table. A lot of those low S, low armor, low WS troops fall into the chaff category and both WL and SM likely mince most chaff units they happen to contact.Findolfin wrote:It would be a major undertaking but I would be curious, all armies considered, to see the average number of models per armies that generally fall into each of the columns.
My bet is that the toughness 3 & 4 column coupled to 5+ to 3+ armor save rows consist in the large majority of existing troops in the warhammer unit roster.
Maybe if I get bored enough, just finished Uni for life so I have some time .
Last edited by gaz on Sat May 24, 2014 4:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
just wait for 9th edition and the new to hit table, it will change everything, I am calling it now hehehehegaz wrote: Well any unit that's hitting SM on a 5+ will also be hitting WL on a 5+
-
- Green Istari
- Posts: 13847
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:26 am
- Location: Otherworld
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Ok gaz, I can't vouch for the effectiveness of the SM's in the army of the Crossroads winner, that would require detailed knowledge of how his army works. I am arguing for the Shield of Saphery set-up which works quite differently. Now you can do this with Lions too so I guess we have to assume this to be able to compare. The main point about this is that Blessing of Lileath, the Book and relatively low casting values make this phase unusually reliable. So spells like HoG are more of a factor to consider. Shield also makes the SM's much more resistant to ranged damage, their main weakness.
We also need to factor in World Dragon. This instantly rules out many of the strongest units in the game (Beasts, Skullcrushers, etc.) from the comparison because both elites trash them. Then look at things like Demigryphs. Because of the Ward, Swordmasters beat them anyway. Cav buses? The 1+ RR characters probably have magic weapons so they stand by while the elites kill their unit. If that is, Arcane Unforging hasn't nerfed them already.
Where the comparison matters is against non-magical attack troops for example infantry. The elite block will usually be deployed towards the centre of the table (because of M5) and so will often end up fighting these. SM's are better here. If you only have one elite block it needs to be able to deal with a wide range of enemies. If two I would take Lions and PG.
Ben Curry recently made the point on Asrai that number-crunching only gets you so far, you need to use the units in question to see how they function in real game situations. Seredain has used this unit in 20 or so games and rates it. The problem is, RL has prevented him posting batreps to illustrate this. Which is why such input from other players would be very valuable here.
We also need to factor in World Dragon. This instantly rules out many of the strongest units in the game (Beasts, Skullcrushers, etc.) from the comparison because both elites trash them. Then look at things like Demigryphs. Because of the Ward, Swordmasters beat them anyway. Cav buses? The 1+ RR characters probably have magic weapons so they stand by while the elites kill their unit. If that is, Arcane Unforging hasn't nerfed them already.
Where the comparison matters is against non-magical attack troops for example infantry. The elite block will usually be deployed towards the centre of the table (because of M5) and so will often end up fighting these. SM's are better here. If you only have one elite block it needs to be able to deal with a wide range of enemies. If two I would take Lions and PG.
Ben Curry recently made the point on Asrai that number-crunching only gets you so far, you need to use the units in question to see how they function in real game situations. Seredain has used this unit in 20 or so games and rates it. The problem is, RL has prevented him posting batreps to illustrate this. Which is why such input from other players would be very valuable here.
A New Blog (Orcs and Goblins)
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
- Eltherion2
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 1:39 pm
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Curu
I meant 2013 ETC not having any Swordmasters in the HE lists. (I will correct in previous post)
cptcosmic
Thanks for the Maths hammer tables.
The bottom 1+ AS with re-rolls row isn't right for the WLs as it is higher than the 1+ AS without re-rolls.
I meant 2013 ETC not having any Swordmasters in the HE lists. (I will correct in previous post)
cptcosmic
Thanks for the Maths hammer tables.
The bottom 1+ AS with re-rolls row isn't right for the WLs as it is higher than the 1+ AS without re-rolls.
Highest Australian Ranking 31
2015 Club Championship (Runner Up)
2014: 2nd Place Barglecon II, 2nd Place Conviction (High Elves)
2013 Barglecon I Best General (High Elves)
2011 M.O.A.B 10th Place (Dark Elves)
2010 Devilcon 4th Place, Blood on the Reich 2nd Place (Skaven)
2015 Club Championship (Runner Up)
2014: 2nd Place Barglecon II, 2nd Place Conviction (High Elves)
2013 Barglecon I Best General (High Elves)
2011 M.O.A.B 10th Place (Dark Elves)
2010 Devilcon 4th Place, Blood on the Reich 2nd Place (Skaven)
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
I see your point. I would be more inclined to go with characters and PG (easier to run deep and pop units by having combat res and breaking steadfast). Also easier to hide a mage in rank 2.SpellArcher wrote:Where the comparison matters is against non-magical attack troops for example infantry. The elite block will usually be deployed towards the centre of the table (because of M5) and so will often end up fighting these. SM's are better here. If you only have one elite block it needs to be able to deal with a wide range of enemies. If two I would take Lions and PG.
I don't disagree, but there's only so much I can do from my desktop. I think that, unless you play a lot of games, allowing personal experience to guide you too much can also be a trap. This is, in part, a game of chance after all.SpellArcher wrote:Ben Curry recently made the point on Asrai that number-crunching only gets you so far, you need to use the units in question to see how they function in real game situations.
As for my personal experience, every time I've run SM against Lizardmen (my most common opponent) they get shot to pieces by skinks / salamanders and this has never been an issue for my WL.
Ward stacking would affect affect this but I would be concerned about the LM access to scroll + cube to shut down my magic phase (leaving the SM without protection). Another common opponent in Ogres would have the Hell Heart causing the same problem.
I'd also be concerned about the archmage getting assassinated by something expendable charging in (though this is true vs any opponent though). Even a 3++ on an otherwise naked mage is not that reliable.
As for crossroads, I think that was only 17 SM and I think that that is quite a different thing to what I am talking about above. There was no high magic but regen from the Loremaster could have been a factor. At that low number I think SM are better than WL. My guess is that that list worked through target saturation but that is just a guess.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Yea, 20 games is not enough to learn how to use them properly being that varies depending on what army you are playing against and how their army setup is like.SpellArcher wrote: I don't disagree, but there's only so much I can do from my desktop. I think that, unless you play a lot of games, allowing personal experience to guide you too much can also be a trap. This is, in part, a game of chance after all.
The best one is forcing yourself to play with swordmasters for enough amount of games with the exact same list and getting the hang of it (ie making it work on a constant basis) before switching to something a little different (like High magic ward, no ward, BotWD, other magic banners etc)
Pretty much you need to be sadistic and do not care about losing games (or be in it just to lose games hehehe)
Yea the SM looks cool, but the WL isnt that far off.gaz wrote:On that we can agree . They are also really easy to paint, which is nice.cptcosmic wrote: also it does not take into account that the SM look cool
It is the PG that looks horrid to me, I cannot get past the new helmets, they also did the exact same thing to DP. Pretty much I am keeping my metal DP and PG.
-
- Green Istari
- Posts: 13847
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:26 am
- Location: Otherworld
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
PG are certainly a good candidate for a single ellite block. They might take a bit longer to chew through Stubborn opponents, though the superior static res is good against many things. Seredain played the set-up since the army book came out and played a proto-version of his list under the old book, so I think he had a good enough feel for whether the unit was working for that list. He dropped it for SCGT but that was because he didn't like the constraints having the second mage (essential to the magic phase and hence the Swordmasters) was putting on his play.
The double scroll point is a good one (Bretonnians can do it too). I guess you might screen them at first and put a big effort into drawing one early. Hellheart the same (you aim to pull his scroll) and he wants to get fairly close to both mages. Some miscast results are fine because of World Dragon. But as you say on the Crossroads list gaz, you'd be aiming to make a big nuisance of your cavalry etc. to help the SM's out here.
The double scroll point is a good one (Bretonnians can do it too). I guess you might screen them at first and put a big effort into drawing one early. Hellheart the same (you aim to pull his scroll) and he wants to get fairly close to both mages. Some miscast results are fine because of World Dragon. But as you say on the Crossroads list gaz, you'd be aiming to make a big nuisance of your cavalry etc. to help the SM's out here.
A New Blog (Orcs and Goblins)
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
- Swordmaster of Hoeth
- Southern Sentinel
- Posts: 4480
- Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 9:01 am
- Location: On the path of an outcast
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
A few random comments as the topic grew up too much to address all of the things that have been mentioned:
1. There is no need to choose between Swordmasters and Lions as you can have both. They can work together as a great team.
2. The fact that you didn't make SM/WL work for you does not meant they cannot work for somebody else or that they are useless.
3. The fact that majority of players don't take them does not mean the units are bad. Every player has their own reasons to include or not certain regiments. Every player has their own criteria as to what is "optimal".
4. Units fighting one on one in the frontal assault is just one of the many situation that can happen. Flank/rear attacks are preferable. If you cannot do it that does not matter others cannot either. It may not be easy, it is often difficult but not impossible.
5. What does 75% board control mean? How is that number calculated? What are the error margins? Or is it just a random number to make your argument look more scientific?
6. So you didn't really use Swordmasters but keep telling people they are useless. How is that help those who want to use them? Have you ever considered that what you advice is forcing people to play the very same version of the army list? If all players took what is "optimal" according to one set of criteria then where would be the variety? Do you really want to advice net listing?
7. I wish Ant Spiers was still active player.
I think that's it. I would love to contribute to the topic where solutions are discussed. Where variety is encouraged.
1. There is no need to choose between Swordmasters and Lions as you can have both. They can work together as a great team.
2. The fact that you didn't make SM/WL work for you does not meant they cannot work for somebody else or that they are useless.
3. The fact that majority of players don't take them does not mean the units are bad. Every player has their own reasons to include or not certain regiments. Every player has their own criteria as to what is "optimal".
4. Units fighting one on one in the frontal assault is just one of the many situation that can happen. Flank/rear attacks are preferable. If you cannot do it that does not matter others cannot either. It may not be easy, it is often difficult but not impossible.
5. What does 75% board control mean? How is that number calculated? What are the error margins? Or is it just a random number to make your argument look more scientific?
6. So you didn't really use Swordmasters but keep telling people they are useless. How is that help those who want to use them? Have you ever considered that what you advice is forcing people to play the very same version of the army list? If all players took what is "optimal" according to one set of criteria then where would be the variety? Do you really want to advice net listing?
7. I wish Ant Spiers was still active player.
I think that's it. I would love to contribute to the topic where solutions are discussed. Where variety is encouraged.
Twitter @SwordOfHoeth
High Elves MSU - Observations
Rabidnid wrote:Are you seriously asking someone called Swordmaster of Hoeth why he has more swordmasters than white lions? Really?
-
- Green Istari
- Posts: 13847
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:26 am
- Location: Otherworld
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
This is controversial but I believe Ant Spiers is one of the two best English Warhammer players. The problem is, no-one I have met enjoyed playing him. Whether this has anything to do with his lack of activity, I don't know.
A New Blog (Orcs and Goblins)
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=70550
Cavalry Prince Reloaded
http://ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=70001
- Swordmaster of Hoeth
- Southern Sentinel
- Posts: 4480
- Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 9:01 am
- Location: On the path of an outcast
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Hi SA,
Apparently some personal reasons.
Apparently some personal reasons.
Twitter @SwordOfHoeth
High Elves MSU - Observations
Rabidnid wrote:Are you seriously asking someone called Swordmaster of Hoeth why he has more swordmasters than white lions? Really?
- Curu Olannon
- Vindicated Strategist
- Posts: 4929
- Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:21 am
- Location: Oslo, Norway
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
No. This is a claim without reference or backup of any kind, despite multiple arguments the other way.Swordmaster of Hoeth wrote: 1. There is no need to choose between Swordmasters and Lions as you can have both. They can work together as a great team.
The fact that nobody has made them work is a strong indication that they are an inferior choice to other units in our book. If you disagree, I`d really like to see a reference. Again, I`ll be the first one to admit I was wrong if presented with a well made point. Are you comparably open-minded, i.e. are you willing to admit that any of our units are inferior to others?Swordmaster of Hoeth wrote: 2. The fact that you didn't make SM/WL work for you does not meant they cannot work for somebody else or that they are useless.
From a competitive point of view, having a list capable of winning a tournament is optimal. Everything else is subjective. Sure you can define "optimal" as fun to play or whatever, but from a purely competitive point of view this is irrelevant, which is the basis for this discussion.Swordmaster of Hoeth wrote: 3. The fact that majority of players don't take them does not mean the units are bad. Every player has their own reasons to include or not certain regiments. Every player has their own criteria as to what is "optimal".
Depends on the matchup, but against good players this is very hard to achieve with M5 infantry and should not be relied upon. See question below.Swordmaster of Hoeth wrote: 4. Units fighting one on one in the frontal assault is just one of the many situation that can happen. Flank/rear attacks are preferable. If you cannot do it that does not matter others cannot either. It may not be easy, it is often difficult but not impossible.
It is a rough figure to show that the aggressor can usually establish control and do as he pleases in 3 out of the 4 table quarters, with the defendor having control over the last quarter. See my latest CD report for an example. The figure is not precise, nor meant to be scientific in any way. It is calculated by counting up the amount of quarters on table and subtracting the one the defendor castles in. This is so common because a castle is very hard to attack. With most defendors like this, multiple sacrifices will be presented as well, for example sole mages/runesmiths etc.Swordmaster of Hoeth wrote: 5. What does 75% board control mean? How is that number calculated? What are the error margins? Or is it just a random number to make your argument look more scientific?
For a player wanting to win tournaments, I would advice against choices that are likely to be inferior. If someone wants to try a novel approach I`m all for making that approach work, but as I`ve said before I`ll also quickly discard such an approach when it`s clear that it doesn`t work. I also don`t get the point about variety, we already have multiple strong approaches. Again, if more exist then by all means I`m for people experimenting to make it work. To answer the questions specifically:Swordmaster of Hoeth wrote: 6. So you didn't really use Swordmasters but keep telling people they are useless. How is that help those who want to use them? Have you ever considered that what you advice is forcing people to play the very same version of the army list? If all players took what is "optimal" according to one set of criteria then where would be the variety? Do you really want to advice net listing?
"How is that help those who want to use them?"
Obviously, it`s not. That`s why I am commenting on them in a context where their choice isn`t mandatory. You don`t see me going in people`s blogs where they say they want to make Swordmasters work no matter what and tell them not to bring them. If that is the case, I`d rather look to unexplored territory or just not reply at all.
"Have you ever considered that you advice is forcing people to play the very same version of the army list?"
No, I have not. I find this to be a very absurd argument, given the fact that I always comment on list choices relative to the focus of that list. You have never seen me advice Tethlis to play the Star Dragon, or John Rainbow to run the cavprince, for example.
"If all players took what is "optimal" according to one set of criteria then where would be the variety?"
One set of criteria could still mean multiple strong lists. The variety would be between these of course, and probably also unexplored territory. Variety for variety`s sake however is not something I would advice for competitive play.
"Do you really want to advice net listing?"
For High Elves I don`t think there exists a netlist. Do you? If yes, what is this list? Even if it did, I would advice it for players looking to learn how to play better. Learn to walk before you can run and so on: improving your game is inherently easier if the list is strong. If nothing else, it doesn`t hurt to try. If you don`t like you can always discard it.
Solutions are discussed here. The solution is either not to bring Swordmasters at all, or try a new approach with them. Maybe a swordstar with anointed + L4 high could be viable for example? All we know is that all games so far point to the fact that they are inferior. Just because some units in our book just don`t cut it doesn`t mean we lack variety. Our internal balance is loads better than for most of the other 8th books in my opinion.Swordmaster of Hoeth wrote: I think that's it. I would love to contribute to the topic where solutions are discussed. Where variety is encouraged.
Retired from Warhammer. Playing Warmachine & Hordes (Cygnar).
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
- Curu Olannon
- Vindicated Strategist
- Posts: 4929
- Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:21 am
- Location: Oslo, Norway
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Moved a couple of posts that were a bit off-topic to Ferny`s blog: http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic. ... 56#p879456
Retired from Warhammer. Playing Warmachine & Hordes (Cygnar).
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
- Prince of Spires
- Auctor Aeternitatum
- Posts: 8270
- Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:07 pm
- Location: The city of Spires
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Some good points going back and forth I think. I found the table by gaz especially helpfull I must say. While I agree with SA that there are lies, damn lies and statistics, it does show that combat wise you can expect roughly the same results from 21 SM and WL. Note that the 20% difference mark is usually about a 1 kill swing either way. Except against t3 models, where SM have a serious advantage.
I do think it should be kept in mind when looking at the table that there is a diagonal line running through bottom left to top right for how common certain troops are. Barring characters, I don't think there are very many t5 and over troops with a 1+ or even a 1+ rerollable armour save. Generally speaking, the higher the T the lower the armour save you will run into.
@Gaz, seeing the table, can you also run the numbers for either 10 (in 7+3 formation) or 14 SM/WL? I think one of the uses for SM over WL (and has been mentioned here) is is a MSU setting. With 21 SM/WL, the SM only have about 30% more attacks. With 14, the SM already have about 45% more attacks and for 10, the SM have almost 65% more attacks. So the smaller the unit the more in favour of SM the calculations should be. Of course, I don't know how hard it is to change the number of attacks of each unit...
Which probably explains some of the disagreements between Swordmaster and Curu. Swordmaster runs a MSU list, where smaller units of SM have more of an edge on WL. Curu runs a more "traditional" list with slightly bigger blocks, where the advantages of SM over WL are more negligible, combat wise.
Small point I did notice is that high magic benefits SM more then WL vs non magical shooting. Because they start at a higher ward and have a worse armour save, each extra point of ward makes a bigger difference for SM then WL. For 100 s3 wounds, 22 more SM will die then WL. Get 2 high magic spells, and this difference reduces to 11. Vs 100 s5 shooting wounds, the difference goes from 17 more SM to only 6 more with +2 to wards.
Rod
I do think it should be kept in mind when looking at the table that there is a diagonal line running through bottom left to top right for how common certain troops are. Barring characters, I don't think there are very many t5 and over troops with a 1+ or even a 1+ rerollable armour save. Generally speaking, the higher the T the lower the armour save you will run into.
@Gaz, seeing the table, can you also run the numbers for either 10 (in 7+3 formation) or 14 SM/WL? I think one of the uses for SM over WL (and has been mentioned here) is is a MSU setting. With 21 SM/WL, the SM only have about 30% more attacks. With 14, the SM already have about 45% more attacks and for 10, the SM have almost 65% more attacks. So the smaller the unit the more in favour of SM the calculations should be. Of course, I don't know how hard it is to change the number of attacks of each unit...
Which probably explains some of the disagreements between Swordmaster and Curu. Swordmaster runs a MSU list, where smaller units of SM have more of an edge on WL. Curu runs a more "traditional" list with slightly bigger blocks, where the advantages of SM over WL are more negligible, combat wise.
Small point I did notice is that high magic benefits SM more then WL vs non magical shooting. Because they start at a higher ward and have a worse armour save, each extra point of ward makes a bigger difference for SM then WL. For 100 s3 wounds, 22 more SM will die then WL. Get 2 high magic spells, and this difference reduces to 11. Vs 100 s5 shooting wounds, the difference goes from 17 more SM to only 6 more with +2 to wards.
Rod
For Nagarythe: Come to the dark side.
PS: Bring cookies!
Check out my plog
Painting progress, done/in progress/in box: 167/33/91
Check my writing blog for stories on the Prince of Spires and other pieces of fiction.
PS: Bring cookies!
Check out my plog
Painting progress, done/in progress/in box: 167/33/91
Check my writing blog for stories on the Prince of Spires and other pieces of fiction.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
If you're running a true MSU list rather than comparing depleted units there's every chance you'll have 10 lions in a cube rather than a 7 wide line. There are reasons why you wouldn't, but that would probably be the default. Not that it'll affect the maths much, but it does impact on return hits.
The 9th Age: Alumni
Former Roles: Advisory Board, HR, Moderator and Highborn Elves Army Support
Former Roles: Advisory Board, HR, Moderator and Highborn Elves Army Support
- Curu Olannon
- Vindicated Strategist
- Posts: 4929
- Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:21 am
- Location: Oslo, Norway
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
If a WL unit is reduced to ~10 or less it is usually better to go as a cube, unless you face templates galore...
Retired from Warhammer. Playing Warmachine & Hordes (Cygnar).
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
I've found a way to make Swordmasters work by taking a High Archmage Lvl4 with BoH + 5++ Ward + ICI and a BSB with the Razor Standard, Dragon Armour and a Great Weapon to make up for their weaknesses. It's a good option if you're going for a single elite infantry block and not using the Razor Standard on a PG unit. Something like a Helmbus + big SM block.
Here's a list at 2600pts I've used for a couple of games and worked OK (sorry, don't have any proof from batreps and am too busy and inexperienced in the art to prepare some proper batreps at the moment):
I'm thinking of trying this High Magic lvl4 build plus the RazorBSB in other lists where I'm not using my beloved PG with the AP banner. The 6++ from the BSB's Dragon Armour is also nice for stacking Shield of Saphery Ward saves. A unit of 25 in 3 ranks of 9 (Martial Prowess pseudo-horde) with these characters puts out 33 S5 AP and 3 S6 AP all on WS6. With Ward saves and Wildform support things become even more deadly for their opponents.
Here's a list at 2600pts I've used for a couple of games and worked OK (sorry, don't have any proof from batreps and am too busy and inexperienced in the art to prepare some proper batreps at the moment):
I should note that I had a 450pts limit on unit size due to comp restrictions. Swordmasters with AP are much better targets for spells like Wildform because of the 2 attacks and higher WS. Hand of Glory works better on the Swordies as well because of guaranteeing WS7 to get hit on 5+ against WS3 and WS9 forcing WS4 to hit the Swordies on a 5+.Lords -%24,8
1x Archmage (The Lore of High Magic) - Level 4, Book of Hoeth, Talisman of Endurance, Ironcurse Icon = 310
1x Prince - Barded Elven Steed, Giant Blade, Dawnstone, Dragonhelm, Potion of Foolhardiness, Heavy Armour, Shield = 276
Heroes -%17,5
1x Mage (The Lore of Beasts) - Elven Steed, Level 2, Dispel Scroll = 155
1x Noble - Battle Standard Bearer, Razor Standard, Dragon Armour, Great Weapon = 154
1x Noble - Barded Elven Steed, Ogre Blade, Enchanted Shield, Luckstone, Heavy Armour = 139
Core -%25,1
16x Silver Helms - Shields, Full Command = 398
5x Ellyrian Reavers - Bows = 85
5x Ellyrian Reavers - Bows = 85
5x Ellyrian Reavers - Bows = 85
Special -%18,8
24x Sword Masters of Hoeth - Full Command, Banner of the World Dragon = 392
Rare -%13,8
1x Frostheart Phoenix = 240
1x Eagle Claw Bolt Thrower = 70
1x Eagle Claw Bolt Thrower = 70
1x Eagle Claw Bolt Thrower = 70
1x Eagle Claw Bolt Thrower = 70
Total = 2599
I'm thinking of trying this High Magic lvl4 build plus the RazorBSB in other lists where I'm not using my beloved PG with the AP banner. The 6++ from the BSB's Dragon Armour is also nice for stacking Shield of Saphery Ward saves. A unit of 25 in 3 ranks of 9 (Martial Prowess pseudo-horde) with these characters puts out 33 S5 AP and 3 S6 AP all on WS6. With Ward saves and Wildform support things become even more deadly for their opponents.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Sure thing. Inspired by cptcosmic, I think I have found a better way (using color gradient) to represent how much of an advantage/disadvantage each unit has against common enemy stats so I'll include that first for the 21 man units already discussed:rdghuizing wrote: @Gaz, seeing the table, can you also run the numbers for either 10 (in 7+3 formation) or 14 SM/WL?
Now for 14 (+champ) in 7 wide formation:
And for 10 (+champ) in 7 wide formation:
I'm doing this quickly right before bed so (given my past oversight regarding 1+ RR ) it might be best to double check these numbers.
EDIT:Color schemes altered slightly
Last edited by gaz on Mon May 26, 2014 10:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Hmm, just realized that neutral ratios of 1/1 aren't always represented by the neutral color (yellow). I'll fix it tomorrow.
FIXED
FIXED
Last edited by gaz on Mon May 26, 2014 10:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 12:08 am
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Curu, I can see why people are talking to you in a defensive manner. Remember that stopping the conversation with absolutes goes against what a discussion board is about. Ex: Someone asking, for the sake of discussion, what happens when 20 PG are flanked by SM shouldn't be met with "It'll never happen if that person is good."
- Curu Olannon
- Vindicated Strategist
- Posts: 4929
- Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:21 am
- Location: Oslo, Norway
Re: Swordmasters / White Lions Debate
Fair point Ben, but I don`t see the point in mathhammering out something that simply isn`t realistic. It`s interesting to note that this one case in question here is a good example of scenarios that are presented as an argument, but it won`t happen ingame. Not against a strong list / player, anyway. That is the entire premise for all of my arguments in this thread, which I have stated multiple times now.
Again, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Swordmasters getting across the field intact and flanking PG on both sides is something I just don`t understand how is possible, given the nature of a strong list featuring PG, hence I`d like to see how. Until then, running numbers isn`t something I`m keen on doing.
Again, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Swordmasters getting across the field intact and flanking PG on both sides is something I just don`t understand how is possible, given the nature of a strong list featuring PG, hence I`d like to see how. Until then, running numbers isn`t something I`m keen on doing.
Retired from Warhammer. Playing Warmachine & Hordes (Cygnar).
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::
Follow me on Courage of Caspia, my blog.
Warhammer blogs from 2011-2015:
:: Path to Glory - High Elves Army Blog ::
:: Curu Olannon's Vindicators - 2500 points Army Blog (Old book, outdated) ::