Impact of Magic in 8th Ed… A question

The internet seems to be advocating large blocks of troops to make them steadfast… and everyone says “you need that 5th rank”

But at the same time everyone is bitching about how “broken” magic is now…

So, given that you see a number of spells now that will pretty much NUKE a unit and you’ll have a very difficult time stopping it…. Here are some thoughts…..

1. Will it cause the game to shift towards running more units at the expense of unit size? (ie, if you run 2 units of 25 vs 1 unit of 50 – dwellers won’t hurt you as bad cause you’re mitigated your risk by not running a mega block)  Seems to make sense to me…  you give up steadfast, but gain a measure of protection vs the nuke

2. How viable is that big “uber unit” when they can get popped pretty easily by devastating magic that you really can’t stop reliably?  Will magic will cause a decline in the character heavy pointsink blocks?

Would love to see comments.

Advertisements

About clt40k

This blog is here to capture my obsession with painting little plastic men... You NEVER really get over being 11...
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Impact of Magic in 8th Ed… A question

  1. Nikephoros says:

    So here are my thoughts since you asked…

    1. I think people are making a huge mistake running big units for the sake of running big units or running small units for the sake of running small units. This is a mistake. You choose unit size based on the needs of that unit and it’s role in your army. Just like in 7th, you don’t overpay for combat resolution. Each CC unit either wins combat by killing or resolution, or it’s job is to win by attrition or not to win at all and be a bunker. While fear of big pie plates and magic is a concern, I don’t think you let it dictate how your units should be composed. TL;DR, Run units how they are most effective for their specific combat role.

    2. The best hordes are ones you can afford to lose 1/3rd of. A horde of HE spearmen can handle being hit by Dwellers Below. It will kill half of them, but they should still retain some combat effectiveness and really that spell only killed like 125 points. A horde of Chaos Knights does not want to be hit by Purple Sun. Losing 1/3rd of a 900 point unit is much worse. But that shouldn’t happen if we follow the maxim from rule one. Chaos Knights are best a 5 man MSU bombs that go in an kill a bunch of stuff. They don’t win by combat res, so running them as a horde trying to win by res is using them out of their optimal mode and you’re asking to get whacked by magic or cannon balls.

  2. Alex says:

    I played a game against a goblin army with my lizards where the goblins ran 5 regiments with 50 models a piece. We cut the game short and my Slann met a tragic early death, so I never got Dwellers off – but I still needed to use the rest of my spells to buff my units so I couldn’t have dumped tons of dice into Dwellers each turn, and with that many horde units on my opponent’s side, that spell may not have single handedly decimated his whole army.

    Obviously, magic is very powerful now, but my guess is spells like Dwellers were put in with the idea that cheap horde units who become very powerful with steadfast now have a weak point to exploit.

  3. clt40k says:

    Alex, I think you’re right… Problem that I see is that the internet seems to be really pushing the steadfast stuff… it seems very common to the Nob Biker craze a while back.

    I think ultimately a good balanced army will will win out over gimmicks… But, I am starting to think that the impact of magic will not be the friend of large hordes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s