That makes me sad. I don't want to see Empire armies being either all Knights or a just a gunline and cannons. The State Troops are SUPPOSED to be the heart and anvil of the army.
My biggest criticism of TOW in general is that infantry in general has no competitive purpose. Everything is heroes, monsters, cavalry, and flying things.
@@owb1979 My largest fear is that doing this would turn cavalry instantly useless, but I agree. If they limit linehammer and re-introduce step up, that might be the best case scenario.
@@owb1979 Disagree. Step up is a terrible mechanic that doubles lethality of the game and makes things like cavalry explicitly useless. You don't want step up. You want 8e. Go play it.
Real talk though. State Troop vs Orc. Same cost. 1 less T. No furious charge. No choppas. No Warband. No Waaaaagh synergy. Only advantage the state troop has is leadership (unless orcs have rank bonus) and no impetuosity. State troops should be cheaper.
Yoemen guard feel like what state troops should be. Warband brings your leadership 6 to 9 at 40 man strong. You get veteran, Shield wall, shield and light armor with either Spear or halberd at their baseprice of 5 points per model. Pay 30 points get stubborn and a second unit champ.For 1 point per model you can go pole arms and have the option to change between Spear and halberd. Slap a 45-point Sargent at arms in there, and now they will always give ground instead of fall back in good order.
Wild that Bretonnian men-at-arms, known for being chaff which the knights hold in disdain, hold the line better than Empire state troops, known for being the anvil to the hammer of Imperial gunpowder.
I think Ld8 on champions would be good as the chain of command holds them together and free drilled on all infantry and then you get an army that can drill and maneouver effectively and where the chain of command is important
@@KoezhVukotic Higher leadership on sergeants would absolutely be a cool benefit, or a cheap character like the sergeant-at-arms Bretonnian Men-at-arms have access to.
ToW is mostly based off WAB 2nd ed (Ancient Battles) But yes, they forgot to adjust the system for the higher lethality and magic. Infantry is sadly pretty trash overall
However in 6th edition the detachment rule as unique for the empire, whether that balanced things or not, I don't remember well. Also Handgunners fired an extra d6 during the first volley, which allowed them to maybe get to fire at something if the empire player got the first turn.
@@FrankBehrens-gd7eu I tink that the entire 6th ed sucks compared to 8th ed. also I was to juvenile to play smart back then so I don't think I got much mileage out of the rules such as detachments.
The funny thing is if you look at Bretonion exiles, the yeoman guard are exactly the tar pit he's looking for! Also because they live in the borderlands they're not even that french!
Reminds me of the days of 7th edition (at least I think it was the 7e books). Dark elf warrior was cheaper than a state trooper, had higher movement, weapon skill, initiative, leadership and hatred of everything in the game. I think GW and their games would really benefit from a more obvious points/stats/capabilities balance.
Hold on there! Elves might be a milita, High Elves at least, but they spend decades training in units. Remember. they have the regimental rules too. Don't think for a moment the Empire has any military advantage over the High Elves in training. Cause they don't.
I don't think that's the implication at all. He was just saying that being a full time professional military is a unique identity for empire infantry just sitting there unused.
empire infantry as a baseline SHOULDNT be good, they should be mediocre. but (!) they should be the foundation for a force multiplier. thats how combined arms work.
As an elf guy. Elf militia are better trained than any human. Why? expected age of the participants. Elf militia are warrior trained and move on to new skills within elf society.
Games Workshop is obsessed with making Empire State troops the most bland and vanilla trash unit they possibly can so that every other army can feel special. It's infuriating. It's been this way for decades.
@@patgray5402 I’d disagree… solely for mentions of 8th Edition. I can’t say I played much at all before 8th, but in 8th, State Troops being brought with halberds in a Death Star with some incredulous number of characters to buff them was… common and effective. Outside of that, it does seem true enough that State Troops tend to be the baseline, and suffer for it accordingly.
Empire Troops should have stubborn and shield wall built in for 1pt more, and raise the LD.. But personally I could change the regimental/detachment rules a bit to.. making so that both the regimental and detachment can use the supporting rules.. and I would add a nother supporting rule.. the Supporting Countercharge.. meaning any regimental or detachment can countercharge the unit charging any unit in the regiment. Pivot, charge move.. if this moves brings you into the path of the charging enemy unit, they charge your unit instead and you count as charging to. Cuz atm.. regimental rules SUCK.. they are so limiting.
I think empire troops should have shieldwall and horde and warband and stubborn and be two or three points cheaper.....then the'yd be as good as bretonnian peasants, lorewise the worst infantry in the world.
I solved these problem with: 1. BSB (on Pegasus or just horse) with Imperial banner (panic, fear and Terror on 3d6 minus max roll). 2. Veteran state troops (spearmen in my case) with banner of Iron resolve (Stubborn for reg unit and detachments) 3. General of empire with bedazzling helm (2+ armor -1 to hit) and white cloak for ward. 4. Optionally Arch lector on altar grants immunity to fear and panic rerol Let the other units do the killing. General and his bodyguards must just survive. Tank, chickens, cannons and knight kill people. General commands.
Don’t give the troops the special rule, give the sergeants the one time re-roll. Then the rule could be powerful, as the opponent can counterplay it. I would love to see the empires strength, and weakness be their command structure. That includes the low level sergeants, who could have special rules to reflect this. Furthermore, detachments getting the bonus from their parent units sergeant would provide a way to have a stubborn screen that doesn’t risk your valuable leadership and command buff. If being able to have your sergeant challenged out makes this rule worse. Give the empire more ways to navigate combat around that. Through a look out sir equivalent or bodyguard ability. (A purchasable armsmaster in a squad with an extra attack who can accept challenges in place of captains/sergeants and generals is something brettonian men at arms get with the grail monk and it makes them so good at tarpitting solo characters)
God bless you mate. The worse part about the infantry is that to make them at least decent on paper is to add all the officers and even then it’s a 400-500 pt unit that can be eaten up by everything
Really love all your ideas. State Troops should be a desired part of the classic combined arms empire army. Would love to see their training expressed in other ways. (Veteran?) State Missile Troops having a USR to let them fire in 2 ranks would be nice, rather than pure stats increases. Or you could go the way that some of the fan made alternatives to WHFB went and have an orders system linked to Captains and Generals of the Empire. I really hope the Empire Arcane Journal expands on the State part of the army.
Love the ideas but really that won't work as they become too expensive. A) T3 inft need a points drop. B) T4 inft particular with 4+ save and Heavy Cav slight increase C) most importantly, army balance, unit minimum sizes and points needs revision to address the ease of which monsters/MSU mash that dominates the competitive scene. It simply doesn't pay to have infantry block unless it is points denial or an effective character delivery system e.g Dwarves/beastmen. I have the same issues with HE spearmen, other options available are far superior.
State Troops should have LD 8, be Drilled and have an infantry-wide rule that is shared among all the standing army units that gives them Shieldwall without having to actually possess a shield (call it "Fight as a Unit" or "Remember your Training"). Alternatively, give them Steady in the Ranks, as if they were heavy infantry, so that it is harder to disrupt them from flank/rear. Not a big boost, but it would help to differentiate them from warband type units like Militia and Men-at-Arms. Vets should have the above rule, LD 9, Martial Prowess to allow them to fight in extra rank from all sides like elf spearmen (it's a small bump up, but a lore-friendly one) and optional Stubborn for 0-1 units per 1000 pts. Greatswords should enjoy the same Shieldwall-type rule and at bare least be heavy infantry, it strikes me as a glaring omission that they are not. Carroburg Greatswords, if they ever make a return, should have the above, in addition to Killing Blow or once-per-game rule that allows them to fight back even if their front rank got wiped out ("Make them Pay Dearly" or some such). Reiksguard would be a nice addition in one of the Armies of Infamy lists (perhaps later on as a 0-1 pick for Magnus as the emperor) with the same Shieldwall-type rule, Stubborn, full-plate, WS4, LD9 and a halberd rule that lets them fight in extra rank like the Black Guard. Make them 13-14 points per model, to make wielding big blocks prohibitive, but give them some sort of interaction with an army general, similarly to how Hammerers can issue challenges when in a unit with King/Thane.
6th/7th ed Empire player here - this is a historical dilemma - welcome to playing the Empire. You are correct in your analysis. A state troop in base contact with an enemy model is essentially another -1 to your break test. The detachment rule was supposed to make up for this by denying the ranks/outnumber combat res and adding flank charge, but chuking in 5+ more swordsman into combat just gave the enemy 5 more kills so was rarely worth it. I came to realise that State Troops aren't a tarpit, they are a magnet - they are the bait. They are the reason the enemy is coming to get you instead of hiding from your cannons.... Is there value in thinking about your strategy in this way?
Empire troops are not great, and I thought this was pretty clear from the moment I saw the boosting effects from Warrior Priests were so weak. There is just only so much you can do with the base level stat line no matter the price, and it's a mistake to try and fix this by giving them special rules. For starters I think giving them new special rules will take away from what they are - the Old World is a horrifying place for a humble human to be, and they shouldn't be reliably standing against the countless horrors they face. And on a purely mechanical level giving them new upgrade options will quickly price them close to some heavy infantry - a point for stubborn and a point for shield wall and you're paying 9 points per spearmen and that's just making the problem worse. The answer, I think, is to revisit captains, warrior priests and witch hunters and just go a little nuts. Give them upgrades that are very generous for their price, knowing they are needed to offset the basic weakness of state troops. These characters should remain modest fighters, they are heroic leaders, not combat monsters. But they should lead state troop units to make them heroes despite their modest stats. That's the empire theme. Witch hunters' Suffer Not rule should grant hatred to the unit, no matter the enemy type - don't make players guess during list building. On top of this they should be able to pick one of the other benefits (MR2, Flaming Attacks or Magical Attacks) and give it to the unit if they pass a Ld test. Warrior Priests should be Ld 8, and Lectors Ld 9. Hammer of Sigmar should be automatic and require no roll. Shield of Faith should grant a ward save against any wounds, not just shooting. Soulfire should be cast in the combat phase. For Priests of Ulric, Winter's Chill should always be in play, while Wrath of Winter and Battle Howl should both be useable in a single turn. For Captains (and Generals) they should get a new special rule, similar to the Tomb Kings, allowing them to pass a Ld test and grant their unit either +1 WS or +1 In for that player turn. There would be a bit of an issue with these rules making knights a little bit too strong, but perhaps this could accounted for by making horse upgrades to these characters very expensive, so you'd pay a much greater premium to put these upgrades on cavalry units.
"Fill the gaps, hold the line!" Empire State troops can attack with the full front rank at all times, no matter casualties taken. Maybe have any fill in attacks strike last.
@@SNDKNG or maybe have it as a size limit, so if you have multiple ranks you are going to be filling in, but once you are down to the last two you don't have it. Lets them fight in blocks better over line hammering it
18:22 State troops already have a special rule, you've just not been using it. The old detatchments rule is folded into the detatchments/regimental units rules, which are now technically universal rules but only empire gets melee detatchments still. These detachments are big boosts to their ability to hold the line by negating enemy rank bonus and bringing a 'second set' of rank bonus to help deal with First Charge nonsense. Doubly true if you source stubborn onto them via magic banner or greatswords. If you're bringing a solo block of 30 state troops instead of 20 + 10 I think you're making a mistake both thematically and mechanically. They're still over-costed, but if you're not turning them into combined-arms bear-trap you aren't playing them to their strength while still paying for it in points.
Last time played Empire was all the way back in 6th Edition. The State Troops are virtually identical to the 6th Edition ones. The number one rule of state troops then was that detachments are a must. They have to be effectively selected for the situation, and maneuvered to guarantee their ability to counter charge into a flank or deliver wounds through stand and fire. Without that support they will always be lack any quality. Plus a cheap Captain with a Great sword to add a wound or two to the combat result and give Leadership.
I feel like state troops would have a decent place in a meta that actually rewarded core infantry. Unfortunately, the Old World rules are squarely in the hero-hammer/monster-mash camp. So basic infantry end up being mostly a points tax, and state troopers in particular just end up being bog standard infantry. (i.e. a bog standard points tax)
Even after this video people are still lining up to offer suggestions or arguments as to why State Troops don't suck. Don't even need to address that stuff, want to know how you truly determine State Troops are bad? Compare them to Bretonnian Men at Arms or Yeomen Guard. Simply put Yeomen Guard are an absurdly cost-effective burger loaded with two patties, bacon, cheese, sauteed onions, mushrooms, tomato, and whatever else you'd want in your burger. It costs you so little, in fact, you wonder how the place making these and selling them is still able to make a profit. Surely they're a front for smuggling pegasi or something? State Troops are a similarly priced burger but with none of the good stuff added into the base cost. Instead you have to pay for each additional condiment and topping, all of which you kind of want but struggle to justify purchasing as the cost on your burger rises rather quickly. What you're left with is an overpriced burger that's at best no better than the option above, and often times worse even, despite costing more. Men at Arms are possibly the cheapest burger on the block. You get them at a hole-in-the-wall that probably wouldn't pass a food inspection, but the food tastes good and no one has died yet so nobody questions it. The burgers they sell also come with most of the toppings you'd want, enough that you're not really going to complain about missing out on just X or Y, especially given the cost. People imagining State Troops as workable infantry are not only missing the movement focused gameplay of OW they're also not judging cost effectiveness very well even within the realm of infantry. Look at Men at Arms and Yeomen Guard for Bretonnia and tell me State Troops compare well to that. Yeomen Guard are almost 1:1 to State Troops by stat-line but come with either a Halberd and Shield or Spear and Shield, both options are free. Of course like any good anvil infantry unit they have Horde, Warband, and Shieldwall too, none of which they have to pay any points for. They also get Veteran for free instead of paying 2ppm like Veteran State Troops do. The kicker is Yeomen Guard are 5ppm too, just like basic, naked State Troops. It's not even comparable. Men at Arms are the budget version of that, they lose Veteran, are WS2, and gain Levies, but are 4ppm and get a Polearm, which is a Halberd and a Spear two-in-one (you choose which profile before you fight). Still more efficient than State Troops in that role because they keep the trio of important rules in Horde, Warband, and Shieldwall to keep them in place, and care little for the WS2 nerf making them marginally less effective in terms of offense and survivability. At 4ppm? That's not bad at all. Goblins are paying 4ppm for spearmen with far less durability in the same role/category of infantry. Now you tack on the ability for both Yeomen and Men at Arms to get two unit champions, just to really frustrate the errant character that foolishly stumbles into your brick, and you're looking at a really silly unit for its cost. State Troops should have been given an army entry very similar to Yeomen Guard, with multiple free weapon options (HW+Shield, Spear, Halberd) and a few 1ppm weapon options (Halberd+Shield, Spear+Shield) and give them more special rules baked in (Horde, Warband, Shieldwall), as well as the option to buy one or two more at 1ppm max (Stubborn, Veteran). 2ppm for Veteran when Yeomen Guard get it for free is a travesty.
Yeomen are only taken in an arcane journal army that no one uses competitively. You want to play Bretonnia with little calvary no ward and a crappier Empire cannon be my guest lmao
@@CyrodiilCome And? How does the use rate of the army have anything to do with a particular unit entry in it and how good or bad that unit is? If a Chaos Lord was only available in the Ogre or Skaven books would that make the unit terrible all of a sudden? Hardly. Also no clue how you figure a Bombard is much if at all worse than a Great Cannon. It keeps all of the important features of the Great Cannon (AP-3, D3+1) and on top of that it has a better Misfire table. Dropping to S8 for a 20% reduction in cost is at worst a side-grade not meaningfully felt against 99% of the targets in this game, and given the Bombard costs as much as Dwarf Cannons but people don't seem to think 100pts for a S8 Cannon with less AP and 1 less damage is a bad proposition, even without the superior Misfire table, I don't get how you come to the conclusion the Bombard is even remotely bad/worse than the Great Cannon.
@@LawL_LawL because its a rank and flank game. You are playing with armies not units like skirmish games. Empire's state troops might be weak at fighting back but they're pretty okay at keeping things tied up so you can shoot them or cast magic at them. Yeomen are better than Men at arms because the entire point of that arcane journal is to have better infantry at the cost of a lot of Bretonnia's calvary shenanigans. Units may be good but it doesn't make a good army. Hense why Empire more consistently wins tournaments more than Bretonnia.
@@CyrodiilCome Empire are strong because they have artillery parks and gunlines, not because of overcosted state troops taking a beating. I never once claimed Exiles are a broken or even strong army, what are you on and why do you still think this is a good point to make? The "entire point" of that arcane journal is also most certainly not to have better infantry at the cost of cavalry "shenanigans." In fact if you ask any comp player about the strongest Exiles list it is literally THE cavalry shenanigans list with the Vanguard banner on Peg Knights. Don't have the Blessing? Big woop, you're Vanguarding 10" up the board and rolling to go first with a +1 as your army has a low drop count. The moment you overrun or contact a fleeing unit you gain Blessing on your unit and any attached characters (all of the beat stick Barons). That is quite possibly the most "cavalry shenanigans" list in the entire game as basically nobody else can/will want to Vanguard 1000points of their army in for a first turn charge. Nomadic Waaagh cannot compete in terms of how strong a Vanguard death star they can field and the Warriors of Chaos cavalry army looks like it's dead on arrival with terrible restrictions and poor buffs. Also have you actually had a look at Empire lists actually being used in tournaments, like SBOT? About half out of 9 players in SBOT, the ones who actually start to pick up wins by the end of the 5 round event, field ONE solitary brick of Veteran state troops ~20 strong. None of the players who had any success (3-2 at best) field multiple large bricks, and certainly not of basic State Troops. A few more ditch bricks entirely and field MSU Veterans instead. MS fucking U. Holy shit you could not possibly be more wrong about bricks of infantry having some magical role to fulfill if more people run MSU melee as chaff than run properly deep infantry blocks. Almost all, meanwhile, fielded multiple wizards, lots of artillery pieces, gryphs, and space-buying units that are more often than not not even melee State Troop units but Archers and Missile Troops instead, who take just as many activations to kill as MSU State Troops and still offer some incidental firepower or scout/vanguard utility. Your notion of some role-fulfilling melee State Troop bricks doing their job to win a game is a fantasy from low level play where people are losing more by tactical blunders than by list building and unit capabilities. And back to unit capabilities, State Troops aren't even that good standing there and taking a beating. Dedicated units like Swarms vastly outperform them without character support, for a fraction of the cost. Some monstrous creatures that cost as much as a State Troop brick and don't get shifted nearly as easily, also without character support, can do the same too. Undead with similar character support to State Troops outlast them by miles. Obviously even Men At Arms, the "shit" infantry Bretonnia has, are better than State Troops, so you banging around about Exiles being bad is incredibly aimless. The cavalry army that runs a dozen Peg knights down your throat can throw down a block or two of infantry better than the infantry army's infantry are. State Troops are just bad units even within the realm of infantry, and Old World is not an infantry game.
@@LawL_LawL in my comment I legit say most empire players run msu of state troopers not big bricks. You are now making up arguments instead of addressing any problems listed.
I’ve been echoing this same sentiment for months; these state troops don’t feel like soldiers, they feel like free company. My personal suggestion is give standard state troops the ability to buy warband and shield wall, and veterans should just come with it. Maybe a bit drastic, but when I’m paying 300 points for 29 dudes to just have veteran and an extra weapon skill, I feel just a bit cheated
I played Empire from 6th ed to 8th. Empire as a whole suck, they have the coolest fluff but a terrible army. I remember Demigryph knights were added just to give them some holding power, but by that point ET was around the corner. If you like artillery just play dwarfs
State troops leadership 8? NO. that's elven territory. Veteran state troops? ....maybe. But Leadership 9? NO. that's dwarf levels of stubborn. They should have a built in Hold the Line Mechanic though. maybe attached to a command crew, that allows them to reroll break tests without Hero support. that would represent their 'training' although state troop training isn't exactly uniform across the empire. i do agree they should have shield wall when taking sword and Board. Not Spear and Shield though. Thus far Sword and Board troops are... basically worthless. taking a Spear is almost always better when Ap options aren't around. They should just have warband. there is no reason whatsoever that bloody Men at Arms are superior holding troops to State Troops. They're so broken as a infantry unit.
@@skeith1543 I might be alone in this, but I do miss the old Parry rule. Even if it wasn’t brought often, a good Parry roll could always absolutely throw a wrench in your opponent’s plans… and validated sword and board, or even sword and sword! But in TOW, I agree… paying the extra point for a halberd or spear seems just commonplace, because at least they CAN do something.
Herohammer has always been a thing in older editions. I had hoped that newer editions would fix it, but instead we got End Times...so...guess we're back to square one?
GW have never been able to get points values correct, their utterly useless in this regard. TOW needs regular digital points updates similar to 40k to prevent certain units (state troops, rat ogres ect) becoming unusable for the next 5 years…
Generals and Captains should have a choice of bonus like Witch Hunters. Immune to Panic, free "step up", support attacks from every direction like High Elves, something like that. The Chaos arcane journal gave Finest Warhorses to Chaos cavalry, so GW isn't afraid to give out unique rules to other armies. That will keep Empire infantry at a relatively human level, and emphasize the importance of the military command structure. Maybe give them an extra unit champion model like the Grail Monk, like an old veteran trooper who can inspire the unit so long as he stays alive. Maybe even give them another character choice like a Lieutenant. Similar in power to a Sergeant at Arms, a mini character who won't be slaying Chaos Warriors any time soon but are basically made to be put into a unit and buff it.
@@JohnPC00 A new character choice would be an amazing option, since Empire, while having so many characters… needs cheaper options to supplement a lot of units.
I mean I don't disagree that State Troops aren't good. But you can't just examine one block of infantry versus another block of infantry in a vacuum in terms of point cost. IMO point costs are also calculated in terms of the over all strengths and weaknesses of the army. Empire has things like Hell Blaster, Great Cannons that make roughly equivalent Dwarf weapons seem bad etc. I'm not trying to argue that all armies are on equal footing or strength and also not saying that balance doesn't need to be done. Just stating that I think it's a bit harder to just compare unit A to unit B without more context to the other all army designs.
That way of thinking goes out the window when you can simply not take state troops at all, and use those points for more cannons. This is a game where you take your good stuff, and don't take the bad stuff. State troops are the bad stuff.
@@patgray5402 Yeah they're bad but every army for better or worse has bad units that you just don't take. There are definitely bad choices within the Beastmen army as well but Ungors weren't discussed. If you're hoping for every army to have all of their units be effective you're playing the wrong game. It would be nice for sure but it's never been like that in any edition that I've played imo, if we are talking about competitive level play. I'm simply saying you can't compare State Troops to Gors without taking into context the way the entire army is meant to play. Like I said I am not actually trying to argue that State Troops are good, just that the comparison to Gors doesn't really hold up for me.
veteran spearmen cost (9pts)= high elf spearmen cost... veteran swordsman with shield (8pts) = dark elf with shield, dwarf warrior in heavy armor. standard state are bad... veteran are trash
@@patgray5402 You have to take 500 points of core in a 2k point game, the only thing arguably better than state troops is knights, and they are very frail for points. Even in terms of just taking ap 0 wounds (most favorable to knights) they are 7.33 points per wound versus the 5 for state troops with halbirds or 4.67 for spear and shield. Adding just 1 ap exposes a huge gap: 11 vs 6 or 5.83. Ap 1 or higher attacks are common. A size 8 bretonian knight lance will deal 62 points of damage to knights, or 35 points to state troops. The clapback is 47.7 for knights (assumed 8 line) versus 23.3 (assumed 12 wide). The point differential is 14 vs 12. And thats the first round, assuming they hold rounds 2+ those halbirds are gonna massacre the knights. To be clear, no empire core is good, but you need 25% and regular state troops are probably the best way to fill that tax.
I think State Troops should also have Pikes as weapons option , they would forego the option of shield like Halberd but can attack in 3 ranks and always strike first when enemy charges them but reduce movement -1. So they would have Halberd if you want extra damage, spear + shield for better against range and pikes if you just want your enemy to stay there forever. Or they can make their armour ignore -1 AP to make their light armour actually matters and they will stick around longer to represent the Empire industrial state issues armament which the lore also stated that the Empire equip their troops on average much better than any human nation in the Old World.
I haven't played lots of TOW yet, but I played a lot of Fantasy 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th so please take my comment with that in mind. I see a lot of people having the 8th mindset but if anything TOW is more something like 6th or 7th with a bit more kick to troops. My point being, when Mordian ask for a special rule, did he forget that state troops have detachment? In the olden days, your infantry wasn't winning because it was the best, but because you could combined arms in a charge reaction. 40 Halberds with shield cost 295pts. If you bring a unit of 20 spears with shield and a detachment of 10 veterans halberds is come to a total of 235pts and I feel you'll win more fight that way because of the detachment flanking the opponent and getting 2 close order bonus. If you spend the extra points in a few guns, you might even get 1 or 2 extra kills and combat results, but then your frontage will get extra wide, so not a good comparaison.
Forgiveness is given Mordian. The other problem than the inbuilt crapness of State Troops is that the units and rules that should really buff their output ( Regiment/Detachment, Witch Hunters and Warrior Priests) also..... SUCK 😢 The fact is that armies like Beastmen and Orks have so many in-built special rules that boost them to the sky in terms of damage output and are so points efficient that State Troopers get chomped. Sad times. Just drop the regular State Troop cost to 4 points and give them Drilled base. Add the options to buy them heavy armour at +1 point as well as shields and keep all the current options as well as buying stubborn. Do the same for Veteran State Troops but drop them to 6 points per model and give them heavy armour included as well as Drilled and Veteran base. Special wargear - Imperial Halberd = +1 strength, -1AP (Armourbane and +1 initiative) - 1 point upgrade for State Troops and replaces Halberds across the army Fixing Witch Hunters and Warrior Priests - NEXT VIDEO PLEASE!
you basically said all the things I was going to say, except one, detachments. In WAP all state units can use supporting actions for other state units within 3 inches. With the detachment rule as it is, the main unit cannot even support it's own detachment. It might require a points change, but it would give a definite reason to field state troops in numbers and give a unique and flavourful play style
you got to run detachments. It does not solve the problem outright but it helps a lot. Halberds are actually the perfect unit for this role as you can't fight in two ranks when flanking the enemy. The empire ties the enemy down by surrounding them with troops. You could also throw in some handgunners for supporting fire as stand and shoot reactions now count towards combat res.
I would personally love if they took the direction of the empire being a professional army in next year's arcane journal. They always seem to be portrayed as essentially militia or freshly drafted troops but in the books and other media you read about the amount of training they receive. I don't think it should go as far as orders like the imperial guard but it could equate to something like 'at the beginning of each round of combat each empire state troop unit may choose a battle tactic' and then give them bonuses depending on which you choose. You could also offer them more charge reactions like 'brace' or something to steal away enemy charge or initiative bonuses. There are so many ways to make them feel like the professional soldiers they are supposed to be. Here's hoping 🤞
Only halfway through the video here, but I have felt the need to throw a comment out. Yes, State Troops are… pretty mid, at best. Now, I think it’s worth asking the ‘why’ here. Comparing them to Beastmen is a hard sell for me. Beastmen have much different tools they work with, as an army, than The Empire. My primary example here is heavy cavalry; who sort of reign supreme in the game at large currently. The combo of first charge, good saves, lances, and almost always striking first because they have more capability to charge… makes cavalry better than almost any infantry in the game. Beastmen lack any heavy cavalry. They make up in some ways for this with a glut of chariots, monstrous infantry, and monsters… and in fairness, Minotaurs border on incredulously good. Now, where does this put us for Beastmen? They’re an army that always does shockingly well, because they have a LOT of rule support, despite lacking heavy cavalry. Considering some of the insane things other armies can manage, I think they fit in-line nicely, but I do believe that in an infantry-heavy game, they’d always hold the advantage. Returning to State Troops… they’re pretty not-ideal, but they have a few tricks up their sleeves. Are they going to beat Gors unsupported? It’s very unlikely, but that’s because they’re built as a unit that’s meant to be run with detachments. Handgunners can add combat Res by standing and shooting for their regimental unit, while supporting state troops can charge in to add extra close orders, and a ton of extra attacks. From a points perspective I don’t think state troops are ever measuring up to Gors, or honestly, even Men-at-Arms. Those are both units with a metric ton of support rules. Even with detachments, handling Gors is far from guaranteed- it’s a dice game, so you of course always run the risk of whiffing, or your opponent rolling well on the charge and absolutely massacring your unit. Where State Troops are good, is that they are cheap- enough- to hold the line for your other army elements. In previous editions, you could field a ridiculously large unit of them and simply force your way through with sheer attrition, but this edition simply doesn’t support that mentality. You need fire support or heavy hitters in melee, both of which the Empire has- and of course there’s the 10-Wound Anvil that is the Steam Tank. I think addressing this from an army perspective would be more constructive. As a unit versus a unit, yes, State Troops aren’t going to win against Gors, or much else; but as an army, Empire does rather well, and State Troops are a large part of what allows their success.
Yeah this is really killing me here. People keep trying to compare the cost of Unit A, versus other armies Unit B in a vacuum. Without taking into context the entire rest of the army, the balance of the army, and the way it's meant to be played. The game just isn't balanced around every single armies units being the exact same in terms of power for points. That isn't me trying to argue that there isn't balancing to be done, and that all units are good. Just trying to say you can't really compare Gors to State Troops, or High Elf Spears or etc.. without looking at the bigger picture of the strengths and weaknesses of the army beyond that.
@@duketogo13 Then don't compare them to other armies. Compare them to other units in the Empire army. Hell, state troops aren't even good compared to the other core infantry in the Empire roster. Any way you look at it, State troops are bad.
@@patgray5402 They offer a numeric quality Empire Knights can’t provide, while Empire Knights provide charge range and potential punch that the State Troops don’t possess. FCM are kind of terrible in my personal opinion, and Veteran State Troops almost never make up for their cost comparatively to normal state troops; the higher WS just isn’t worth enough. That is to say, you COULD just run all knights… and that might be better? They’re equally floppy a unit, because they’re such a large points investment for a unit that seems so incredibly capable of whiffing, or panicking/breaking to the first thing to sneeze at them. I think for EMPIRE core, state troops are plenty decent. Mordian mentions early on, that they can generally hash it with other light infantry, save of course, Gors. I don’t really buy that they’re less useful than other empire core though, unless the argument is knights; and at that point it’s an argument that state troops aren’t heavy cavalry, because ALL heavy cavalry are just that much better than their counterparts in this edition.
Before I comment - I am not a great general. I've not played 100+ games against every single army variation out there. But overall I think Empire (mostly state troops) do need a small boost/redesign- but not another Gee Whiz unit, or making shooting more punishing. Rather, just give greater advantage to the state troops. I think your comment is well said, and I agree on the points (looking at the individual list first, state troops fill a certain role), but I think comparing Empire to other lists is very valid and shows how Empire has recieved the short end of the stick. I'm all for balance, especially when it comes to making an army that is supposed to play like the designers wanted it to play (at least I hope they wanted it to play like the fluff/setting/advertising says they do). Right now, if you want to actually have a use for your core points as Empire- you take perhaps one unit of spears, then knights and Archers. Spears make the most sense statistic wise. It's not unreasonable to realize that a big section of Empire is over-costed, and with minimal changes, would see them at least performing their job - not just handing your opponent points, nor outfighting elves/dwarves/Chaos/Gors on their own - but at least I don't want to sweat if charged by other opponent's chaff. Detachment rules are not as powerful as they were, are expensive (If I have to pay to make a rule work, it's a weak bonus, and as others have said - sometimes it's just handing your opponent more points, especially as removing a t3 shirt wearers is easy) and easily negated - whereas there is nothing I can do to negate a unit's inbuilt warband, horde, primal fury, shieldwall, etc. I would like to see more army's use their core choices, but especially Empire. I'd be happy to take a nerf to the steam tank (2k points game minimum just to take on the field, no matter what they do with state troops) and Demigryphs just to see state troops better. (It would be nice if pistoliers were not impetuous.) Overall, I'm enjoying this edition but I'd like some changes (within reason and balanced - maybe horde for State troops, light armor and no levy rule for FCM, archers have a max take limit, something to make sword and shield useful. Maybe horde for halberds or sword/shield only.) I think the designers dropped the ball, and right the Empire plays best in an unfluffy list format that leaves the players and their opponents unhappy, especially at low points. Or worse, where GW really leans into an unfluffy, unfun steam punk gun line list for the book.
@@stevenrothwell5854 So, I agree… kind of. I feel like to be fair, I can specify that I’m also not ecstatic about where state troops are, but moreover, I think they’re fair. Now, the complaint about Core is… very valid. For more than a few factions. My earlier comment sort of emphasized this, but heavy cavalry are the king in this edition, where light infantry were the king in 8th. I do wish they had thought it out a bit, because frankly, far too often I see armies with core heavy Cav taking solely that to get utility out of their core points. Furthermore, there are a few armies with a considerable lack of ‘bad’ core. Bretonnia to point one finger, and I’d go as far as to say that even the Tomb Kings have pretty decent core, since they’re unbreakable and can Resurrect guys relatively reliably. All that is to say, I can list off the core that suck. Ungors are rarely chosen over the much-better Gors, Warriors of Chaos are second fiddle to MARAUDERS because they can’t handle ANYTHING, and honestly I don’t think High Elf Spearmen are any better than State Troops; the slightly better WS and Ld only goes so far on a unit that is equipped nearly the same, and decently higher in cost. Yet, WoC (as an army) have Chaos Knights, Empire has Empire Knights, High Elves have Silver Helms… there are a lot of core that are useful just because the framework of the game enables them to be. About Pistoleers; I definitely agree, they’re sadly rather useless… which makes them fit in with pretty much all other light cavalry. Shooting is pretty harshly penalized to begin with, but skirmishing Cav usually don’t have anything to make up for that, and their mobility upticks their cost when they have little hope of making it back, ever. Impetuous was fairly extreme on pistoleers though; on the other hand, they’re cheap and have managed to surprise me more than once, though it’s always a fluke of the dice and never a statistical average. Regarding the Steam Tank and Demigryph Knights… The Steam Tank is good, but it doesn’t do much damage, without the right situation allowing it to charge. Other than that it tends to be an anvil, and I would argue a damn good support tool for state troops, in the right scenarios. Demigryph Knights punch well above their weight. I’ll sound like a broken record, but Old World just was designed in such a way, that cavalry with lances or some other high strength/AP attack, and a decent save or toughness, is going to perform VERY well. I do believe Mordian mentions that State Troops should have come kind of special rule unique to them- which could be fair, assuming it’s mild enough to make a difference and not push them to the level Men-at-Arms are at- because if Empire had a unit performing at that level, I think they would contend rather highly, just for the other elements in their list. Someone mentioned that State Troop Sergeants should provide an extra leadership, which sounds like a pretty good idea to me; though it would really force Empire players to protect their champions from sergeants or double up by putting captains into their units. Ultimately, my hope tends to be that the game designers will find a way to reign in cavalry a bit. I think at that point, some units that are MUCH worse-off than state troops (and even state troops) can come into their element a bit more. Things like Greatswords, who I really swear, are bloody abysmal… just too darn expensive to do anything. That all aside, I would hold out hope for the Arcane Journal. While the current suspicion is hinted at a Nuln Battery, we might just see something that puts an emphasis on state troops!
My humble suggestion for improving empire. State: - *Ungrade for heavy armour* perhaps at 2 points per model - *upgrade for shield wall* - *drill upgrade available to all* not just veterans - *Sergents leadership 8* Theyre a nco afterall - *Rules for pikes* perhaps 2 points fighting in 3 ranks? - *stubborn upgrade.
Hate to be "that guy" but, I told you so already with your first video on States Troops several months back. After my first 3 ToW games against 3 different other armies, it was clear that ToW is Hero - Monster hammer and that Empire sucks greatly in general, but in particular the infantry....very very sorry about that. Even the Bretonnian non-knights rubbish is better in this game. Sad story. I dropped ToW and rather play WAP or 8th. with some restrictions...
Fair credit for trying to make empire infantry work, Mordian. It's my favorite way to play empire, a line of three infantry regiments stretching across the board. It's the way empire SHOULD be played, in my opinion. Unfortunately, state troops are the worst, most overpriced infantry in the game, and it isn't even close. State troops could be, across the board, two points cheaper, and they would still be worse than bretonnian men at arms/yeomen guard. And these units are so bad that Bretonnian players aren't building armies around them at tournaments. (I actually did see a yeomen guard bret exiles list recently. He went 0/3). Bretonnians take 0 or 1 MAA units. All infantry is doing pretty poorly right now in TOW. It's all about speed and power projection, which infantry lack, because it's just a kill points game. All infantry is weak, but empire infantry is atrociously bad. You aren't even really going to do well with empire infantry even if your opponent brings a weak infantry heavy list and you get to push your infantry battle lines together. It's a shame, because infantry battle lines maneuvering together and grinding it out is in my opinion the peak warhammer experience. But there's just no real place for it on a competitive level. And empire infantry have no place at all. They are pure trash. Will get mulched by equal points of enemy infantry.
Infantry is just bad in old world, state troops are on the bottom end of infantry, sad times. The one thing they do have is that the rest of the army will shoot and force the enemy to come to them, which gives them the opportunity to engage instead of being walked around.
I agree with your suggestions for optional upgrades for state troops. Except L8 - but Veterans should have LD8. Instead state troops should reduce cost by 1. And Greatswords should have Veteran base.
They are cheap fodder meant to hold positions. The issue is when every unit in the front rank can attack, they just get mowed down where in the past a block of them could actually put up a decent fight into more elite infantry just through sheer weight of numbers and the tricks their characters could pull off in combat. IMHO spearmen are the best unit available as a core choice in the Empire but should only be relied on to block movement. I used to play Warhammer fantasy with probably one of the best Empire players in our region and he always put a strong character in his units. He treated the units as damage sponges while the character (warrior priests usually) wrecked enemy characters (Van Horstman's Speculum) and gave the unit buffs. Meanwhile, cavalry would sweep around the flanks. Imho the best infantry Empire has access to are Flagellants and Greatswords, Spearmen with maybe a couple of Crossbow units are just there to fill your Core requirements.
@@ProxyHammer1 Van Horstman’s Speculum! What a special kind of rage that could instill in me! Especially when you just had an inkling in your mind that some Sub-100 point wizard was about to wreck your blender of a character that was issuing a challenge… Honestly I’m rather glad it’s gone, but it did make for a fun psychological thriller for the non-Empire player!
Warrior Priests also should be Ld8. They are supposed to rabble raisers and demagogues. Having the same leadership is silly. Then their prayers would actually have a decent chance of doing something. Give War Altar an ability for priests to reroll failed prayers and there you go.
As Empire player myself, i face similar thoughts, and try find a solution. Here it is: Veteran state troops, 25-30 men strong, Griffin standart, BSB with Warbanner and... 2nd hero, captain at most with GW, supported by mage (battlemagic or demonology) State troops is NOT for hitting, its for static combat result. They are anvil, and stank/cavs are the hammer.
To be honest you need to use characters and use the detachment mechanic to drive state troops to do what they need to do. There are many ways to use detachments to your benefit. You need to figure State troops as regiments with support. Each block should have at least one captain in it and two supporting detachement (one ranged and one melee usually) and they are not the hammer of the army you generally need somehing else as the hammer. Empire is a combined arms army and if you try to run with state troops as the majority of the troops they don't have enough punsh. You need artillery and hammers to do that. What I have found to make state troops effective and actually able to do damage is to put your General and or Captain on to a Demigryphon. They actually fit nicely in the unit and also help with using less models in the back rank for rank bonuses as well. A six or seve wide spearmen unit then becomes a good unit, throw in a warrior pries as well and it is really tanky and do quite good damage. You don't have more than one regiment in a 2000p game, there simply is not enough points. Archers in scouting is also prety good for slowing down and/or break up enemy formtions and they can also do some decent damage to certain untis, even if it is only a few wounds here and there. A captain on a Demigryphon can also leave their unit and go solo once the combat line breaks up, he will be quite good on it's own too. The Demigryph is also good as it has the "First Charge" ability, this also works within a state troop unit if it charges. A cheap survivable Captain on a Demigryph is Halberd/GW, Pistol, Charmed/Enchanted Shield and a luckstone... 2+ save and pretty good dmage output, count as pretty much two models in each of three ranks (FAQ seem to support that). So it is very good economy. In my opinion State knights are more terrible, they are way too expensive for only having a 3+ save, 3+ saves is so much worse than 2+ saves. Unless you make a fluffy cavalry army you should never use them.
On leadership 8 humans. No, sorry i would happily give you warband, but a +1 yo leadership means that state troops have the same lesdrship as an elf or a dwarf. Nope
I think GW likes to overcost the detachment rules, thinking they're the best thing ever since sliced bread and also thinks they are the be all end all of imperial professionalism. Except that it isn't unique to them anymore. One of the cool things is, detachments do transfer some paychological effects, like hate. But nowadays the empire doesn't have easy access to hate anymore, because the Sigmar priest doesn't grant hatred towards everyone anymore. Now you need a witch hunter, and need to choose between hating undead, hating chaos, or hatimg wizards. On top of the witch hunter, or any empire character, not being exactly great either. I hope that GW reacts with the arcane journal, giving us an infantry army that gets such direly needed buffs. Maybe something like drilled for free and new orders for captains.
WHF/ToW has always had an issue with costing, Everything follows this bizare pattern that a stat increase = +1pt. Light armor is 1pt. A shield is 1pt. Veteran is 1pt. Insert special rule is 1pt. +1T is 1pt. +1ws/BS is 1pt and It seldom strays from this model. The problem is not all stats and additions are equal as you say a 3+/4+ armor save is worth something more. Especially when anything greater than AP-2 is so rare. It really skews for the core troops which are cheap enough to be taken in large numbers. State troops should have base cost 4ppm, but at 5 they're 25% more expensive than they should be. Furthermore, state troops have no special rules baked into their base cost whereas pretty much every other faction has special rules baked into their base costs. Look at all the other factions and their special rules that provide benefits are not considered into the cost. IF you run the formula using state troops as the base line you'll see my assumptions are accurate when it comes to infantry. Then it's blatantly clear that state troops are shafted and even that extra point makes a difference with such low end units.
Honestly I think in general they should fix the basic infantry by doing something like allowing more ranks to strike back. Now, some armies have a huge advantage (gores for their points for example) and most infantry will do 0 because they've had the front rank whiped by whatever op character/monster wiped the front line. 2 ranks of fighting troops for regular infantry, 3 for spears will already be a good change in my book!
Don’t forget Witch Hunters can buff units - problems with Witch Hunters are terrible rules around choosing their special rule during list building, rather than before game like spells, and terrible armour save.
I'm gunna try sticking a level 2 wizard with deamonic vessel in a unit of halberdiers, it'll get em up to 2 attacks, S5, AP2, armour bane 1. Can also use the flying spell that gives em I think a 12 inch fly? So could take a unit of like 23 Veteren Drilled Halberdiers, 6x4 rank, use these two spells and go zoom.
@@01001Wintermute Wide with spears, is definitely the best way for infantry to succeed in this edition. Everything else needs to be tough as nails with a damn good armor save to stand a chance.
@@PaulGoldstone-fm2rx It’s certainly not ironclad; but infantry units with spears simply get access to a volume of attacks fewer other units can, especially deployed wide. Beyond that it boils down to your enemy, deployment, and generalship… in scenarios where you’re going to eat 2-3 charges, you may want to spend a previous turn positioning to force a few hard charges (some units could fail) or reform for a smaller front, in order to deny a charging unit any where to contact you. Though in the nature of this game, even being able to contact corners between units means an entire unit gets to fight- so you have to be careful to not limit yourself too much when you’re dropping your frontage, or to drop that frontage enough that an enemy’s optimized charge is going to wider on each side by one or more, to prevent other units from contacting your front arc.
I agree. State troops are just not worth it. I haven't won a single combat with them, despite fielding two blocks of 31 halberdiers with a Priest in several games. Handgunners are even worse, and were an outright liability. A shame as they are so colourful and should be a basic part of any Empire army. I thought it was just an editing mistake that Warrior Priests and Sergeants are not Leadership 8. And that they are not automatically Drilled when they are supposed to be drilled professionals is weird. Medieval handgunners skirmished (in no small part because they had pouches of gunpowder and burning fuses, so standing next to each other was mad! Also being armed with at most a dagger or a kitchen knife was an incentive to run away from someone armed with an actual sword or bloody big axe!!), so I'd allow handgunners to skirmisher and fire & flee. That way you'd see handgunners in front of the halberd blocks, firing at the enemy, then running away behind the safety of the pike block behind - which "looks right". Halberdiers should be able to Fight in Extra Rank. (Which is also how my Highlands Miniatures halberdiers are depicted, with the front rank holding the halberds low and the second rank ushing their halberds overhead!). So: Being able to buff to Ld8 is a no-brainer, and I suspect was an editing mistake. should also be Drilled as a basic characteristic. Handgunner detachments should be able to Skirmish and Fire & Flee. Allow halberds to Fight in Extra Rank and maybe spears to have Shieldwall.
I think that the Empire infantry needs better armor. Fluff-wise for this is the rationale that men are just men, but the empire is vast and organised (beyond most other factions capabilities) and to an extent industrialised. And that this allows them to better forge armor in an almost industrial scale. Thus state troops would have heavy armor with option of buying a shield, and the full plate armor of greatswords is "empire forged full plate" which would be a 3+ armor save. Also something around the lines of better leadership or an ability like which MG described in the clip. This way, the average joe is still a crappy nobody but there is a larger chance for the empire troops to atleast get to strike back. Elves have high WS and I. Dwarves have high WS and T (and often armor saves) and so on. This way the men of the empire would still be average men but somehow get to do something (or try to do something as they still only have 1 attack with poor WS and poor S. Also the shooting of the empire is really lacklustre. Maybe they could have a rule called "Fire by rank" which allowed them to fire more shots but still with garbage BS, which would be the result of them always training and being a standing army and not a levy. Also I wish that the empire, like so many other factions, had the ability to unlock taking elite infantry (either flaggellants or preferably because they are cool: greatswords) as core by taking a certain character. Maybe a general of the empire which is on foot would allow the empire player to take greatswords as core. Currently they are apparantely awful, but with "empire forged full plate" and being taken as core maybe they can start to actually work. I played the most of my fantasy games in 8th edition in the last 5 years. I still really like it when units get to activate all models in the first and second rank, even after taking casualties. This thing in TOW which I remember from 6th ed is such a poor game mechanic because it leads to certain players never getting the feeling of actually doing something in combat. In 8th edition empire state troops were still really poor quality troops, but a 50 man horde of halberdiers with a warriors priest still could actually do something. Now all they can do is die sadly.
The empire isn't organized. It is common for electors to block weapon shipments and supplies to goto empire armies simply because they feel jaded by the emperor.
@@CyrodiilCome The one thing that the Empire of man has that Chaos, orks and beastmen do not have is organisation and industry. That is the Empires main edge against its enemies.
I hate that this happens in all GW games. The meta gets established, people find the myriad of broken things and just take those every time. And it turns out that the new ‘rank and flank’ games does best without either flanks or ranks.
One of the other things that feels kinda weird about the state troops and other “defensive” troops is that your penalized for doing what your supposed to, receiving charges. I feel like halberdiers and spearmen, in general, should get something like reverse impact hits, where the enemy can take hits as they charge into a wall of halberds or spears
To be fair, Empire state troops fill a different role than Gors. Their equivalent would be Ungors not Gors. Empire state troops are suppoed to screen out your range and magic, or allow a cheaky side charge from a knight. Furthermore, Sludgeskin is absolutely broken and shouldn't be held against the empire state troops for not having a direct equivalent
I'd give them horde and warband. Maybe a different version of warband that still gives the leadership buff but not the reroll to charge. Instead it could brace for a charge for some kind of bonus... Idk.
once upon a time state troops was good back when empire was the only one with detacthment rules back when a rank was 4 models back when a flank charge of 5 models would deny the enemy his rank bonus back in 3rd, 4th and 5th eddition 28 dudes w spears or halbard, griffon banner (can give state 50p banner if u had a general), 8-10 archers in skirmish formation to block line of sight (skirmish used to do that) and 10 shield bois to deny rank. stoped playing when they turned empire into topgear (2x tanks and a waralter), thats was before it became monstermadness with hyppoknight galore, back when the state troop defined empire.
I’m all seriousness though, state troops are peak empire for most empire players. I really hope when the full empire book comes out, there will be some rules that seriously buff them.
What hurt Empire was rolling out their Detachment rule to every tom, dick, and harry. Before it was the thingbthat made their lackluster state trooper punch abive their weight slightly.
In my opinion, most infantry, but especially light core infantry in this edition is just not efficient as tar pits (holding the line). Only the undead armies with their regen saves, unbreakable and "healing" make efficient tar pits. Unlike 8th edition, TOW is not friendly to infantry generally speaking (excluding some elite options). Characters with items and some specific banners can make infantry better for some armies. But Heroes, fly, swiftstride, monsters and skirmisher infantry do mostly are better at their jobs.
i have Brettonians , Empire and high Elves i feel that empire is underwhelming a bit. even gw admited it that they know the problem. 1. state troops must have shield wall included in their points 2. must have a rule to boost their LD 3. a way for more points to have some access stubborn (maybe a new veteran sergeant character like the grail monk) state troops right now are a wizard bunker at best or a suicide unit at worst
I have an Empire Army for twenty years. I love the Background and Atmosphere of the Empire. But to be honest Statetroops without Support of Heroes or Magical Banners were never really strong fighters for their own. The Basic Rules of TOW for Close Combat and the mediocre Army List make it worse. But i believe in Deus Sigmar that the upcoming Arcane Journal next year and some Infantry friendly Errata can change the Tournament Meta
Empire infantry always depended on detachment countercharge to deny enemy rank bonus in nearly every edition, IMO. Without that they won't beat anything but skeletons & zombies. Remember, trained humans are the bottom of the barrel in WF. Every other race is either long lived enough that militia have more combat experience than any human, or just built for killing. "Professional army" isn't an advantage, it is the minimum to compete vs. Chaos, Orks, Undead, etc.
Not gonna disagree with you on most points but when you talk about character synergy with units, theirs the magical banner that doubles rank bonus on a bsb, i don't think you dabbled with less fighty more buff characters like arch lectors and warrior priests that are designed to buff units. But yeah i think some of the rules lile warband need to be looked at, close order infantry atm feel like they are there to make other stuff look good. They are the literal punching bag of the game.
![⭐ฮิตในTikTok!! ( หมูเด้ง MooDeng ) Ver. แดนซ์โจ๊ะๆ ReMix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3krsyfWUeHU/mqdefault.jpg)
Mordian accepting reality instead of forcing it to work? Not on my TH-cam!
The honeymoon period is finally over for the Old World. 🫡
It probably wont be long before Mordian is decrying points wargear, too…
To be fair he won a decent number of games with the state troops, more than I would’ve expected lol
Disbelieving reality… that’s my style sir!
Well I mean they are meant to be weak as fuck. They are there to hold off enemies while the arty and cav does their thing.
You are probably right. Sad that GW made design decisions to nerf infantry blocks in general and state troops in particular.
That makes me sad. I don't want to see Empire armies being either all Knights or a just a gunline and cannons. The State Troops are SUPPOSED to be the heart and anvil of the army.
A moment of silence for the regular man trying to make it in this crazy world
My biggest criticism of TOW in general is that infantry in general has no competitive purpose. Everything is heroes, monsters, cavalry, and flying things.
@@Swrdfshtrmbns This is SUPER true, save light infantry that are ULTRA-cheap.
well..the 5th. ed. is back ...
We need step-up back at a minimum
@@owb1979 My largest fear is that doing this would turn cavalry instantly useless, but I agree. If they limit linehammer and re-introduce step up, that might be the best case scenario.
@@owb1979 Disagree. Step up is a terrible mechanic that doubles lethality of the game and makes things like cavalry explicitly useless. You don't want step up. You want 8e. Go play it.
Real talk though. State Troop vs Orc. Same cost. 1 less T. No furious charge. No choppas. No Warband. No Waaaaagh synergy. Only advantage the state troop has is leadership (unless orcs have rank bonus) and no impetuosity. State troops should be cheaper.
State troops should cost as much as Bret men at arms. They have better stats, but don’t come with free gear. So you end up paying for the versatility.
Or maybe all those other types of troops including Beastmen Gors, should be more expensive. 10 points a model.
@@Tigerheart01 infantry are already quite bad. I'd rather make the worst one's better
Maybe add more about their discipline, like free rotation before charching or force marched and reforming in the same turn
@@bleizh_le_rat the drilled state troops should atleast have the drilled rule for free
Yoemen guard feel like what state troops should be. Warband brings your leadership 6 to 9 at 40 man strong. You get veteran, Shield wall, shield and light armor with either Spear or halberd at their baseprice of 5 points per model. Pay 30 points get stubborn and a second unit champ.For 1 point per model you can go pole arms and have the option to change between Spear and halberd.
Slap a 45-point Sargent at arms in there, and now they will always give ground instead of fall back in good order.
Fools will never understand that gnoblar horde is the answer to everything.
Wild that Bretonnian men-at-arms, known for being chaff which the knights hold in disdain, hold the line better than Empire state troops, known for being the anvil to the hammer of Imperial gunpowder.
When you make them vets, put a knight nearby, and pay for a unit champion and upgrade to that champion yes they do better than stock empire infantry
I think Ld8 on champions would be good as the chain of command holds them together and free drilled on all infantry and then you get an army that can drill and maneouver effectively and where the chain of command is important
@@KoezhVukotic Higher leadership on sergeants would absolutely be a cool benefit, or a cheap character like the sergeant-at-arms Bretonnian Men-at-arms have access to.
Love this idea.
Many of the things you said about your state troops we were saying in 6th back in the day, which is basically what old world is
more something like ...between 5th and 6th. ed.
ToW is mostly based off WAB 2nd ed (Ancient Battles)
But yes, they forgot to adjust the system for the higher lethality and magic. Infantry is sadly pretty trash overall
However in 6th edition the detachment rule as unique for the empire, whether that balanced things or not, I don't remember well. Also Handgunners fired an extra d6 during the first volley, which allowed them to maybe get to fire at something if the empire player got the first turn.
@@SinglemSolis didn´t worked..aside for those 5 -militia re-directors :)...(core) infantry sucked (aside from Vampirs/Khemri) .
@@FrankBehrens-gd7eu I tink that the entire 6th ed sucks compared to 8th ed.
also I was to juvenile to play smart back then so I don't think I got much mileage out of the rules such as detachments.
The funny thing is if you look at Bretonion exiles, the yeoman guard are exactly the tar pit he's looking for! Also because they live in the borderlands they're not even that french!
Honestly props to you for publicly changing your mind on the internet :)
I'm amazed he actually thought differently earlier tbh
Yeah, I compared gors to orc boys and it took me about 5 seconds to realize gors are broken
Reminds me of the days of 7th edition (at least I think it was the 7e books). Dark elf warrior was cheaper than a state trooper, had higher movement, weapon skill, initiative, leadership and hatred of everything in the game. I think GW and their games would really benefit from a more obvious points/stats/capabilities balance.
Hold on there! Elves might be a milita, High Elves at least, but they spend decades training in units. Remember. they have the regimental rules too. Don't think for a moment the Empire has any military advantage over the High Elves in training. Cause they don't.
High Elves definitley need some rules that represent them being disciplined as a fighting unit
I don't think that's the implication at all. He was just saying that being a full time professional military is a unique identity for empire infantry just sitting there unused.
empire infantry as a baseline SHOULDNT be good, they should be mediocre.
but (!) they should be the foundation for a force multiplier. thats how combined arms work.
As an elf guy. Elf militia are better trained than any human. Why? expected age of the participants. Elf militia are warrior trained and move on to new skills within elf society.
Games Workshop is obsessed with making Empire State troops the most bland and vanilla trash unit they possibly can so that every other army can feel special. It's infuriating. It's been this way for decades.
All the art, all the fluff, all the advertising uses State troops... and always the goof them up.
@@patgray5402 I’d disagree… solely for mentions of 8th Edition. I can’t say I played much at all before 8th, but in 8th, State Troops being brought with halberds in a Death Star with some incredulous number of characters to buff them was… common and effective.
Outside of that, it does seem true enough that State Troops tend to be the baseline, and suffer for it accordingly.
@@patgray5402 I mean they are the vanilla unit aren't they?
@@ravebiscuits8721 Yes but it doesn't have to be that way.
Empire Troops should have stubborn and shield wall built in for 1pt more, and raise the LD.. But personally I could change the regimental/detachment rules a bit to.. making so that both the regimental and detachment can use the supporting rules.. and I would add a nother supporting rule.. the Supporting Countercharge.. meaning any regimental or detachment can countercharge the unit charging any unit in the regiment. Pivot, charge move.. if this moves brings you into the path of the charging enemy unit, they charge your unit instead and you count as charging to.
Cuz atm.. regimental rules SUCK.. they are so limiting.
I think empire troops should have shieldwall and horde and warband and stubborn and be two or three points cheaper.....then the'yd be as good as bretonnian peasants, lorewise the worst infantry in the world.
Exactly what i just said before i read this
I solved these problem with:
1. BSB (on Pegasus or just horse) with Imperial banner (panic, fear and Terror on 3d6 minus max roll).
2. Veteran state troops (spearmen in my case) with banner of Iron resolve (Stubborn for reg unit and detachments)
3. General of empire with bedazzling helm (2+ armor -1 to hit) and white cloak for ward.
4. Optionally Arch lector on altar grants immunity to fear and panic rerol
Let the other units do the killing.
General and his bodyguards must just survive.
Tank, chickens, cannons and knight kill people. General commands.
but still paying for things that others have for free
Don’t give the troops the special rule, give the sergeants the one time re-roll. Then the rule could be powerful, as the opponent can counterplay it. I would love to see the empires strength, and weakness be their command structure. That includes the low level sergeants, who could have special rules to reflect this.
Furthermore, detachments getting the bonus from their parent units sergeant would provide a way to have a stubborn screen that doesn’t risk your valuable leadership and command buff.
If being able to have your sergeant challenged out makes this rule worse. Give the empire more ways to navigate combat around that. Through a look out sir equivalent or bodyguard ability. (A purchasable armsmaster in a squad with an extra attack who can accept challenges in place of captains/sergeants and generals is something brettonian men at arms get with the grail monk and it makes them so good at tarpitting solo characters)
God bless you mate. The worse part about the infantry is that to make them at least decent on paper is to add all the officers and even then it’s a 400-500 pt unit that can be eaten up by everything
Really love all your ideas.
State Troops should be a desired part of the classic combined arms empire army.
Would love to see their training expressed in other ways.
(Veteran?) State Missile Troops having a USR to let them fire in 2 ranks would be nice, rather than pure stats increases.
Or you could go the way that some of the fan made alternatives to WHFB went and have an orders system linked to Captains and Generals of the Empire.
I really hope the Empire Arcane Journal expands on the State part of the army.
Love the ideas but really that won't work as they become too expensive. A) T3 inft need a points drop. B) T4 inft particular with 4+ save and Heavy Cav slight increase C) most importantly, army balance, unit minimum sizes and points needs revision to address the ease of which monsters/MSU mash that dominates the competitive scene. It simply doesn't pay to have infantry block unless it is points denial or an effective character delivery system e.g Dwarves/beastmen.
I have the same issues with HE spearmen, other options available are far superior.
Tim: "Mom! Can we have Dwarfs?"
Mom: "Timmy, we have Dwarfs at home."
Tim:
State Troops should have LD 8, be Drilled and have an infantry-wide rule that is shared among all the standing army units that gives them Shieldwall without having to actually possess a shield (call it "Fight as a Unit" or "Remember your Training"). Alternatively, give them Steady in the Ranks, as if they were heavy infantry, so that it is harder to disrupt them from flank/rear. Not a big boost, but it would help to differentiate them from warband type units like Militia and Men-at-Arms. Vets should have the above rule, LD 9, Martial Prowess to allow them to fight in extra rank from all sides like elf spearmen (it's a small bump up, but a lore-friendly one) and optional Stubborn for 0-1 units per 1000 pts. Greatswords should enjoy the same Shieldwall-type rule and at bare least be heavy infantry, it strikes me as a glaring omission that they are not. Carroburg Greatswords, if they ever make a return, should have the above, in addition to Killing Blow or once-per-game rule that allows them to fight back even if their front rank got wiped out ("Make them Pay Dearly" or some such). Reiksguard would be a nice addition in one of the Armies of Infamy lists (perhaps later on as a 0-1 pick for Magnus as the emperor) with the same Shieldwall-type rule, Stubborn, full-plate, WS4, LD9 and a halberd rule that lets them fight in extra rank like the Black Guard. Make them 13-14 points per model, to make wielding big blocks prohibitive, but give them some sort of interaction with an army general, similarly to how Hammerers can issue challenges when in a unit with King/Thane.
6th/7th ed Empire player here - this is a historical dilemma - welcome to playing the Empire. You are correct in your analysis. A state troop in base contact with an enemy model is essentially another -1 to your break test. The detachment rule was supposed to make up for this by denying the ranks/outnumber combat res and adding flank charge, but chuking in 5+ more swordsman into combat just gave the enemy 5 more kills so was rarely worth it. I came to realise that State Troops aren't a tarpit, they are a magnet - they are the bait. They are the reason the enemy is coming to get you instead of hiding from your cannons.... Is there value in thinking about your strategy in this way?
Empire troops are not great, and I thought this was pretty clear from the moment I saw the boosting effects from Warrior Priests were so weak. There is just only so much you can do with the base level stat line no matter the price, and it's a mistake to try and fix this by giving them special rules. For starters I think giving them new special rules will take away from what they are - the Old World is a horrifying place for a humble human to be, and they shouldn't be reliably standing against the countless horrors they face. And on a purely mechanical level giving them new upgrade options will quickly price them close to some heavy infantry - a point for stubborn and a point for shield wall and you're paying 9 points per spearmen and that's just making the problem worse.
The answer, I think, is to revisit captains, warrior priests and witch hunters and just go a little nuts. Give them upgrades that are very generous for their price, knowing they are needed to offset the basic weakness of state troops. These characters should remain modest fighters, they are heroic leaders, not combat monsters. But they should lead state troop units to make them heroes despite their modest stats. That's the empire theme.
Witch hunters' Suffer Not rule should grant hatred to the unit, no matter the enemy type - don't make players guess during list building. On top of this they should be able to pick one of the other benefits (MR2, Flaming Attacks or Magical Attacks) and give it to the unit if they pass a Ld test.
Warrior Priests should be Ld 8, and Lectors Ld 9. Hammer of Sigmar should be automatic and require no roll. Shield of Faith should grant a ward save against any wounds, not just shooting. Soulfire should be cast in the combat phase. For Priests of Ulric, Winter's Chill should always be in play, while Wrath of Winter and Battle Howl should both be useable in a single turn.
For Captains (and Generals) they should get a new special rule, similar to the Tomb Kings, allowing them to pass a Ld test and grant their unit either +1 WS or +1 In for that player turn.
There would be a bit of an issue with these rules making knights a little bit too strong, but perhaps this could accounted for by making horse upgrades to these characters very expensive, so you'd pay a much greater premium to put these upgrades on cavalry units.
"Fill the gaps, hold the line!" Empire State troops can attack with the full front rank at all times, no matter casualties taken. Maybe have any fill in attacks strike last.
way too powerful, maybe once per game tho would be cool
@@SNDKNG or maybe have it as a size limit, so if you have multiple ranks you are going to be filling in, but once you are down to the last two you don't have it. Lets them fight in blocks better over line hammering it
it breaks a core game mechanic
Top powerful?
Have you looked at their stats?
18:22 State troops already have a special rule, you've just not been using it. The old detatchments rule is folded into the detatchments/regimental units rules, which are now technically universal rules but only empire gets melee detatchments still. These detachments are big boosts to their ability to hold the line by negating enemy rank bonus and bringing a 'second set' of rank bonus to help deal with First Charge nonsense. Doubly true if you source stubborn onto them via magic banner or greatswords.
If you're bringing a solo block of 30 state troops instead of 20 + 10 I think you're making a mistake both thematically and mechanically. They're still over-costed, but if you're not turning them into combined-arms bear-trap you aren't playing them to their strength while still paying for it in points.
Last time played Empire was all the way back in 6th Edition. The State Troops are virtually identical to the 6th Edition ones. The number one rule of state troops then was that detachments are a must. They have to be effectively selected for the situation, and maneuvered to guarantee their ability to counter charge into a flank or deliver wounds through stand and fire. Without that support they will always be lack any quality. Plus a cheap Captain with a Great sword to add a wound or two to the combat result and give Leadership.
I feel like state troops would have a decent place in a meta that actually rewarded core infantry.
Unfortunately, the Old World rules are squarely in the hero-hammer/monster-mash camp. So basic infantry end up being mostly a points tax, and state troopers in particular just end up being bog standard infantry. (i.e. a bog standard points tax)
Even after this video people are still lining up to offer suggestions or arguments as to why State Troops don't suck. Don't even need to address that stuff, want to know how you truly determine State Troops are bad? Compare them to Bretonnian Men at Arms or Yeomen Guard.
Simply put Yeomen Guard are an absurdly cost-effective burger loaded with two patties, bacon, cheese, sauteed onions, mushrooms, tomato, and whatever else you'd want in your burger. It costs you so little, in fact, you wonder how the place making these and selling them is still able to make a profit. Surely they're a front for smuggling pegasi or something?
State Troops are a similarly priced burger but with none of the good stuff added into the base cost. Instead you have to pay for each additional condiment and topping, all of which you kind of want but struggle to justify purchasing as the cost on your burger rises rather quickly. What you're left with is an overpriced burger that's at best no better than the option above, and often times worse even, despite costing more.
Men at Arms are possibly the cheapest burger on the block. You get them at a hole-in-the-wall that probably wouldn't pass a food inspection, but the food tastes good and no one has died yet so nobody questions it. The burgers they sell also come with most of the toppings you'd want, enough that you're not really going to complain about missing out on just X or Y, especially given the cost.
People imagining State Troops as workable infantry are not only missing the movement focused gameplay of OW they're also not judging cost effectiveness very well even within the realm of infantry. Look at Men at Arms and Yeomen Guard for Bretonnia and tell me State Troops compare well to that. Yeomen Guard are almost 1:1 to State Troops by stat-line but come with either a Halberd and Shield or Spear and Shield, both options are free. Of course like any good anvil infantry unit they have Horde, Warband, and Shieldwall too, none of which they have to pay any points for. They also get Veteran for free instead of paying 2ppm like Veteran State Troops do. The kicker is Yeomen Guard are 5ppm too, just like basic, naked State Troops. It's not even comparable. Men at Arms are the budget version of that, they lose Veteran, are WS2, and gain Levies, but are 4ppm and get a Polearm, which is a Halberd and a Spear two-in-one (you choose which profile before you fight). Still more efficient than State Troops in that role because they keep the trio of important rules in Horde, Warband, and Shieldwall to keep them in place, and care little for the WS2 nerf making them marginally less effective in terms of offense and survivability. At 4ppm? That's not bad at all. Goblins are paying 4ppm for spearmen with far less durability in the same role/category of infantry. Now you tack on the ability for both Yeomen and Men at Arms to get two unit champions, just to really frustrate the errant character that foolishly stumbles into your brick, and you're looking at a really silly unit for its cost.
State Troops should have been given an army entry very similar to Yeomen Guard, with multiple free weapon options (HW+Shield, Spear, Halberd) and a few 1ppm weapon options (Halberd+Shield, Spear+Shield) and give them more special rules baked in (Horde, Warband, Shieldwall), as well as the option to buy one or two more at 1ppm max (Stubborn, Veteran). 2ppm for Veteran when Yeomen Guard get it for free is a travesty.
Yeomen are only taken in an arcane journal army that no one uses competitively. You want to play Bretonnia with little calvary no ward and a crappier Empire cannon be my guest lmao
@@CyrodiilCome And? How does the use rate of the army have anything to do with a particular unit entry in it and how good or bad that unit is? If a Chaos Lord was only available in the Ogre or Skaven books would that make the unit terrible all of a sudden? Hardly. Also no clue how you figure a Bombard is much if at all worse than a Great Cannon. It keeps all of the important features of the Great Cannon (AP-3, D3+1) and on top of that it has a better Misfire table. Dropping to S8 for a 20% reduction in cost is at worst a side-grade not meaningfully felt against 99% of the targets in this game, and given the Bombard costs as much as Dwarf Cannons but people don't seem to think 100pts for a S8 Cannon with less AP and 1 less damage is a bad proposition, even without the superior Misfire table, I don't get how you come to the conclusion the Bombard is even remotely bad/worse than the Great Cannon.
@@LawL_LawL because its a rank and flank game. You are playing with armies not units like skirmish games. Empire's state troops might be weak at fighting back but they're pretty okay at keeping things tied up so you can shoot them or cast magic at them. Yeomen are better than Men at arms because the entire point of that arcane journal is to have better infantry at the cost of a lot of Bretonnia's calvary shenanigans. Units may be good but it doesn't make a good army. Hense why Empire more consistently wins tournaments more than Bretonnia.
@@CyrodiilCome Empire are strong because they have artillery parks and gunlines, not because of overcosted state troops taking a beating. I never once claimed Exiles are a broken or even strong army, what are you on and why do you still think this is a good point to make? The "entire point" of that arcane journal is also most certainly not to have better infantry at the cost of cavalry "shenanigans." In fact if you ask any comp player about the strongest Exiles list it is literally THE cavalry shenanigans list with the Vanguard banner on Peg Knights. Don't have the Blessing? Big woop, you're Vanguarding 10" up the board and rolling to go first with a +1 as your army has a low drop count. The moment you overrun or contact a fleeing unit you gain Blessing on your unit and any attached characters (all of the beat stick Barons). That is quite possibly the most "cavalry shenanigans" list in the entire game as basically nobody else can/will want to Vanguard 1000points of their army in for a first turn charge. Nomadic Waaagh cannot compete in terms of how strong a Vanguard death star they can field and the Warriors of Chaos cavalry army looks like it's dead on arrival with terrible restrictions and poor buffs.
Also have you actually had a look at Empire lists actually being used in tournaments, like SBOT? About half out of 9 players in SBOT, the ones who actually start to pick up wins by the end of the 5 round event, field ONE solitary brick of Veteran state troops ~20 strong. None of the players who had any success (3-2 at best) field multiple large bricks, and certainly not of basic State Troops. A few more ditch bricks entirely and field MSU Veterans instead. MS fucking U. Holy shit you could not possibly be more wrong about bricks of infantry having some magical role to fulfill if more people run MSU melee as chaff than run properly deep infantry blocks. Almost all, meanwhile, fielded multiple wizards, lots of artillery pieces, gryphs, and space-buying units that are more often than not not even melee State Troop units but Archers and Missile Troops instead, who take just as many activations to kill as MSU State Troops and still offer some incidental firepower or scout/vanguard utility. Your notion of some role-fulfilling melee State Troop bricks doing their job to win a game is a fantasy from low level play where people are losing more by tactical blunders than by list building and unit capabilities.
And back to unit capabilities, State Troops aren't even that good standing there and taking a beating. Dedicated units like Swarms vastly outperform them without character support, for a fraction of the cost. Some monstrous creatures that cost as much as a State Troop brick and don't get shifted nearly as easily, also without character support, can do the same too. Undead with similar character support to State Troops outlast them by miles. Obviously even Men At Arms, the "shit" infantry Bretonnia has, are better than State Troops, so you banging around about Exiles being bad is incredibly aimless. The cavalry army that runs a dozen Peg knights down your throat can throw down a block or two of infantry better than the infantry army's infantry are. State Troops are just bad units even within the realm of infantry, and Old World is not an infantry game.
@@LawL_LawL in my comment I legit say most empire players run msu of state troopers not big bricks. You are now making up arguments instead of addressing any problems listed.
I’ve been echoing this same sentiment for months; these state troops don’t feel like soldiers, they feel like free company. My personal suggestion is give standard state troops the ability to buy warband and shield wall, and veterans should just come with it. Maybe a bit drastic, but when I’m paying 300 points for 29 dudes to just have veteran and an extra weapon skill, I feel just a bit cheated
I played Empire from 6th ed to 8th. Empire as a whole suck, they have the coolest fluff but a terrible army. I remember Demigryph knights were added just to give them some holding power, but by that point ET was around the corner. If you like artillery just play dwarfs
Im thinking of a house rule to help our Empire players with this problem . Maybe include Drilled for free for all state troops ?
State troops leadership 8? NO. that's elven territory. Veteran state troops? ....maybe. But Leadership 9? NO. that's dwarf levels of stubborn.
They should have a built in Hold the Line Mechanic though. maybe attached to a command crew, that allows them to reroll break tests without Hero support. that would represent their 'training' although state troop training isn't exactly uniform across the empire.
i do agree they should have shield wall when taking sword and Board. Not Spear and Shield though. Thus far Sword and Board troops are... basically worthless. taking a Spear is almost always better when Ap options aren't around.
They should just have warband. there is no reason whatsoever that bloody Men at Arms are superior holding troops to State Troops.
They're so broken as a infantry unit.
@@skeith1543 I might be alone in this, but I do miss the old Parry rule. Even if it wasn’t brought often, a good Parry roll could always absolutely throw a wrench in your opponent’s plans… and validated sword and board, or even sword and sword!
But in TOW, I agree… paying the extra point for a halberd or spear seems just commonplace, because at least they CAN do something.
@@ianreiter835 precisely! The parryvsave made sword and board useful as proper Anvil units.
men at arms are inspired by the lady! Empire state troops are greedy corrupt mercenaries
Herohammer has always been a thing in older editions. I had hoped that newer editions would fix it, but instead we got End Times...so...guess we're back to square one?
Humans armed with sticks have been rubbish since 3rd Edition and especially since 4th, made victory all the more glorious.... now to the video.
I'm loving using Longbeards as my core choice, S4 and WS5 is really nice
GW have never been able to get points values correct, their utterly useless in this regard. TOW needs regular digital points updates similar to 40k to prevent certain units (state troops, rat ogres ect) becoming unusable for the next 5 years…
Generals and Captains should have a choice of bonus like Witch Hunters. Immune to Panic, free "step up", support attacks from every direction like High Elves, something like that. The Chaos arcane journal gave Finest Warhorses to Chaos cavalry, so GW isn't afraid to give out unique rules to other armies. That will keep Empire infantry at a relatively human level, and emphasize the importance of the military command structure. Maybe give them an extra unit champion model like the Grail Monk, like an old veteran trooper who can inspire the unit so long as he stays alive.
Maybe even give them another character choice like a Lieutenant. Similar in power to a Sergeant at Arms, a mini character who won't be slaying Chaos Warriors any time soon but are basically made to be put into a unit and buff it.
@@JohnPC00 A new character choice would be an amazing option, since Empire, while having so many characters… needs cheaper options to supplement a lot of units.
I mean I don't disagree that State Troops aren't good. But you can't just examine one block of infantry versus another block of infantry in a vacuum in terms of point cost. IMO point costs are also calculated in terms of the over all strengths and weaknesses of the army. Empire has things like Hell Blaster, Great Cannons that make roughly equivalent Dwarf weapons seem bad etc.
I'm not trying to argue that all armies are on equal footing or strength and also not saying that balance doesn't need to be done. Just stating that I think it's a bit harder to just compare unit A to unit B without more context to the other all army designs.
That way of thinking goes out the window when you can simply not take state troops at all, and use those points for more cannons. This is a game where you take your good stuff, and don't take the bad stuff. State troops are the bad stuff.
@@patgray5402 Yeah they're bad but every army for better or worse has bad units that you just don't take. There are definitely bad choices within the Beastmen army as well but Ungors weren't discussed. If you're hoping for every army to have all of their units be effective you're playing the wrong game. It would be nice for sure but it's never been like that in any edition that I've played imo, if we are talking about competitive level play.
I'm simply saying you can't compare State Troops to Gors without taking into context the way the entire army is meant to play. Like I said I am not actually trying to argue that State Troops are good, just that the comparison to Gors doesn't really hold up for me.
veteran spearmen cost (9pts)= high elf spearmen cost... veteran swordsman with shield (8pts) = dark elf with shield, dwarf warrior in heavy armor. standard state are bad... veteran are trash
@@chwalciechomika No state troop unit should ever be given more than a shield upgrade
@@patgray5402 You have to take 500 points of core in a 2k point game, the only thing arguably better than state troops is knights, and they are very frail for points. Even in terms of just taking ap 0 wounds (most favorable to knights) they are 7.33 points per wound versus the 5 for state troops with halbirds or 4.67 for spear and shield. Adding just 1 ap exposes a huge gap: 11 vs 6 or 5.83. Ap 1 or higher attacks are common. A size 8 bretonian knight lance will deal 62 points of damage to knights, or 35 points to state troops. The clapback is 47.7 for knights (assumed 8 line) versus 23.3 (assumed 12 wide). The point differential is 14 vs 12. And thats the first round, assuming they hold rounds 2+ those halbirds are gonna massacre the knights.
To be clear, no empire core is good, but you need 25% and regular state troops are probably the best way to fill that tax.
I think State Troops should also have Pikes as weapons option , they would forego the option of shield like Halberd but can attack in 3 ranks and always strike first when enemy charges them but reduce movement -1. So they would have Halberd if you want extra damage, spear + shield for better against range and pikes if you just want your enemy to stay there forever. Or they can make their armour ignore -1 AP to make their light armour actually matters and they will stick around longer to represent the Empire industrial state issues armament which the lore also stated that the Empire equip their troops on average much better than any human nation in the Old World.
Pikes are just thrusting spears going by imperial dwarfs in old world
They did this in warhammer armies project and it worked quite nice.
I haven't played lots of TOW yet, but I played a lot of Fantasy 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th so please take my comment with that in mind.
I see a lot of people having the 8th mindset but if anything TOW is more something like 6th or 7th with a bit more kick to troops. My point being, when Mordian ask for a special rule, did he forget that state troops have detachment? In the olden days, your infantry wasn't winning because it was the best, but because you could combined arms in a charge reaction.
40 Halberds with shield cost 295pts. If you bring a unit of 20 spears with shield and a detachment of 10 veterans halberds is come to a total of 235pts and I feel you'll win more fight that way because of the detachment flanking the opponent and getting 2 close order bonus. If you spend the extra points in a few guns, you might even get 1 or 2 extra kills and combat results, but then your frontage will get extra wide, so not a good comparaison.
Forgiveness is given Mordian. The other problem than the inbuilt crapness of State Troops is that the units and rules that should really buff their output ( Regiment/Detachment, Witch Hunters and Warrior Priests) also..... SUCK 😢 The fact is that armies like Beastmen and Orks have so many in-built special rules that boost them to the sky in terms of damage output and are so points efficient that State Troopers get chomped. Sad times.
Just drop the regular State Troop cost to 4 points and give them Drilled base. Add the options to buy them heavy armour at +1 point as well as shields and keep all the current options as well as buying stubborn.
Do the same for Veteran State Troops but drop them to 6 points per model and give them heavy armour included as well as Drilled and Veteran base.
Special wargear - Imperial Halberd = +1 strength, -1AP (Armourbane and +1 initiative) - 1 point upgrade for State Troops and replaces Halberds across the army
Fixing Witch Hunters and Warrior Priests - NEXT VIDEO PLEASE!
Oh I'll bet the farm that witch hunters will get tons of new options in the arcane journal.
@@patgray5402 Doubt it. Chaos didn't get any new Gifts or options, they won't change base units and characters, just add in new ones
you basically said all the things I was going to say, except one, detachments. In WAP all state units can use supporting actions for other state units within 3 inches. With the detachment rule as it is, the main unit cannot even support it's own detachment. It might require a points change, but it would give a definite reason to field state troops in numbers and give a unique and flavourful play style
you got to run detachments. It does not solve the problem outright but it helps a lot. Halberds are actually the perfect unit for this role as you can't fight in two ranks when flanking the enemy. The empire ties the enemy down by surrounding them with troops. You could also throw in some handgunners for supporting fire as stand and shoot reactions now count towards combat res.
I would personally love if they took the direction of the empire being a professional army in next year's arcane journal. They always seem to be portrayed as essentially militia or freshly drafted troops but in the books and other media you read about the amount of training they receive. I don't think it should go as far as orders like the imperial guard but it could equate to something like 'at the beginning of each round of combat each empire state troop unit may choose a battle tactic' and then give them bonuses depending on which you choose. You could also offer them more charge reactions like 'brace' or something to steal away enemy charge or initiative bonuses. There are so many ways to make them feel like the professional soldiers they are supposed to be. Here's hoping 🤞
Only halfway through the video here, but I have felt the need to throw a comment out.
Yes, State Troops are… pretty mid, at best. Now, I think it’s worth asking the ‘why’ here.
Comparing them to Beastmen is a hard sell for me. Beastmen have much different tools they work with, as an army, than The Empire. My primary example here is heavy cavalry; who sort of reign supreme in the game at large currently. The combo of first charge, good saves, lances, and almost always striking first because they have more capability to charge… makes cavalry better than almost any infantry in the game.
Beastmen lack any heavy cavalry. They make up in some ways for this with a glut of chariots, monstrous infantry, and monsters… and in fairness, Minotaurs border on incredulously good.
Now, where does this put us for Beastmen? They’re an army that always does shockingly well, because they have a LOT of rule support, despite lacking heavy cavalry. Considering some of the insane things other armies can manage, I think they fit in-line nicely, but I do believe that in an infantry-heavy game, they’d always hold the advantage.
Returning to State Troops… they’re pretty not-ideal, but they have a few tricks up their sleeves. Are they going to beat Gors unsupported? It’s very unlikely, but that’s because they’re built as a unit that’s meant to be run with detachments. Handgunners can add combat Res by standing and shooting for their regimental unit, while supporting state troops can charge in to add extra close orders, and a ton of extra attacks.
From a points perspective I don’t think state troops are ever measuring up to Gors, or honestly, even Men-at-Arms. Those are both units with a metric ton of support rules. Even with detachments, handling Gors is far from guaranteed- it’s a dice game, so you of course always run the risk of whiffing, or your opponent rolling well on the charge and absolutely massacring your unit.
Where State Troops are good, is that they are cheap- enough- to hold the line for your other army elements. In previous editions, you could field a ridiculously large unit of them and simply force your way through with sheer attrition, but this edition simply doesn’t support that mentality. You need fire support or heavy hitters in melee, both of which the Empire has- and of course there’s the 10-Wound Anvil that is the Steam Tank.
I think addressing this from an army perspective would be more constructive. As a unit versus a unit, yes, State Troops aren’t going to win against Gors, or much else; but as an army, Empire does rather well, and State Troops are a large part of what allows their success.
Yeah this is really killing me here. People keep trying to compare the cost of Unit A, versus other armies Unit B in a vacuum. Without taking into context the entire rest of the army, the balance of the army, and the way it's meant to be played. The game just isn't balanced around every single armies units being the exact same in terms of power for points.
That isn't me trying to argue that there isn't balancing to be done, and that all units are good. Just trying to say you can't really compare Gors to State Troops, or High Elf Spears or etc.. without looking at the bigger picture of the strengths and weaknesses of the army beyond that.
@@duketogo13 Then don't compare them to other armies. Compare them to other units in the Empire army. Hell, state troops aren't even good compared to the other core infantry in the Empire roster. Any way you look at it, State troops are bad.
@@patgray5402 They offer a numeric quality Empire Knights can’t provide, while Empire Knights provide charge range and potential punch that the State Troops don’t possess.
FCM are kind of terrible in my personal opinion, and Veteran State Troops almost never make up for their cost comparatively to normal state troops; the higher WS just isn’t worth enough.
That is to say, you COULD just run all knights… and that might be better? They’re equally floppy a unit, because they’re such a large points investment for a unit that seems so incredibly capable of whiffing, or panicking/breaking to the first thing to sneeze at them.
I think for EMPIRE core, state troops are plenty decent. Mordian mentions early on, that they can generally hash it with other light infantry, save of course, Gors.
I don’t really buy that they’re less useful than other empire core though, unless the argument is knights; and at that point it’s an argument that state troops aren’t heavy cavalry, because ALL heavy cavalry are just that much better than their counterparts in this edition.
Before I comment - I am not a great general. I've not played 100+ games against every single army variation out there. But overall I think Empire (mostly state troops) do need a small boost/redesign- but not another Gee Whiz unit, or making shooting more punishing. Rather, just give greater advantage to the state troops.
I think your comment is well said, and I agree on the points (looking at the individual list first, state troops fill a certain role), but I think comparing Empire to other lists is very valid and shows how Empire has recieved the short end of the stick. I'm all for balance, especially when it comes to making an army that is supposed to play like the designers wanted it to play (at least I hope they wanted it to play like the fluff/setting/advertising says they do).
Right now, if you want to actually have a use for your core points as Empire- you take perhaps one unit of spears, then knights and Archers. Spears make the most sense statistic wise. It's not unreasonable to realize that a big section of Empire is over-costed, and with minimal changes, would see them at least performing their job - not just handing your opponent points, nor outfighting elves/dwarves/Chaos/Gors on their own - but at least I don't want to sweat if charged by other opponent's chaff. Detachment rules are not as powerful as they were, are expensive (If I have to pay to make a rule work, it's a weak bonus, and as others have said - sometimes it's just handing your opponent more points, especially as removing a t3 shirt wearers is easy) and easily negated - whereas there is nothing I can do to negate a unit's inbuilt warband, horde, primal fury, shieldwall, etc.
I would like to see more army's use their core choices, but especially Empire. I'd be happy to take a nerf to the steam tank (2k points game minimum just to take on the field, no matter what they do with state troops) and Demigryphs just to see state troops better. (It would be nice if pistoliers were not impetuous.)
Overall, I'm enjoying this edition but I'd like some changes (within reason and balanced - maybe horde for State troops, light armor and no levy rule for FCM, archers have a max take limit, something to make sword and shield useful. Maybe horde for halberds or sword/shield only.) I think the designers dropped the ball, and right the Empire plays best in an unfluffy list format that leaves the players and their opponents unhappy, especially at low points. Or worse, where GW really leans into an unfluffy, unfun steam punk gun line list for the book.
@@stevenrothwell5854 So, I agree… kind of.
I feel like to be fair, I can specify that I’m also not ecstatic about where state troops are, but moreover, I think they’re fair. Now, the complaint about Core is… very valid. For more than a few factions. My earlier comment sort of emphasized this, but heavy cavalry are the king in this edition, where light infantry were the king in 8th. I do wish they had thought it out a bit, because frankly, far too often I see armies with core heavy Cav taking solely that to get utility out of their core points.
Furthermore, there are a few armies with a considerable lack of ‘bad’ core. Bretonnia to point one finger, and I’d go as far as to say that even the Tomb Kings have pretty decent core, since they’re unbreakable and can Resurrect guys relatively reliably.
All that is to say, I can list off the core that suck. Ungors are rarely chosen over the much-better Gors, Warriors of Chaos are second fiddle to MARAUDERS because they can’t handle ANYTHING, and honestly I don’t think High Elf Spearmen are any better than State Troops; the slightly better WS and Ld only goes so far on a unit that is equipped nearly the same, and decently higher in cost.
Yet, WoC (as an army) have Chaos Knights, Empire has Empire Knights, High Elves have Silver Helms… there are a lot of core that are useful just because the framework of the game enables them to be.
About Pistoleers; I definitely agree, they’re sadly rather useless… which makes them fit in with pretty much all other light cavalry. Shooting is pretty harshly penalized to begin with, but skirmishing Cav usually don’t have anything to make up for that, and their mobility upticks their cost when they have little hope of making it back, ever. Impetuous was fairly extreme on pistoleers though; on the other hand, they’re cheap and have managed to surprise me more than once, though it’s always a fluke of the dice and never a statistical average.
Regarding the Steam Tank and Demigryph Knights…
The Steam Tank is good, but it doesn’t do much damage, without the right situation allowing it to charge. Other than that it tends to be an anvil, and I would argue a damn good support tool for state troops, in the right scenarios.
Demigryph Knights punch well above their weight. I’ll sound like a broken record, but Old World just was designed in such a way, that cavalry with lances or some other high strength/AP attack, and a decent save or toughness, is going to perform VERY well.
I do believe Mordian mentions that State Troops should have come kind of special rule unique to them- which could be fair, assuming it’s mild enough to make a difference and not push them to the level Men-at-Arms are at- because if Empire had a unit performing at that level, I think they would contend rather highly, just for the other elements in their list.
Someone mentioned that State Troop Sergeants should provide an extra leadership, which sounds like a pretty good idea to me; though it would really force Empire players to protect their champions from sergeants or double up by putting captains into their units.
Ultimately, my hope tends to be that the game designers will find a way to reign in cavalry a bit. I think at that point, some units that are MUCH worse-off than state troops (and even state troops) can come into their element a bit more.
Things like Greatswords, who I really swear, are bloody abysmal… just too darn expensive to do anything.
That all aside, I would hold out hope for the Arcane Journal. While the current suspicion is hinted at a Nuln Battery, we might just see something that puts an emphasis on state troops!
My humble suggestion for improving empire. State:
- *Ungrade for heavy armour* perhaps at 2 points per model
- *upgrade for shield wall*
- *drill upgrade available to all* not just veterans
- *Sergents leadership 8* Theyre a nco afterall
- *Rules for pikes* perhaps 2 points fighting in 3 ranks?
- *stubborn upgrade.
Hate to be "that guy" but, I told you so already with your first video on States Troops several months back. After my first 3 ToW games against 3 different other armies, it was clear that ToW is Hero - Monster hammer and that Empire sucks greatly in general, but in particular the infantry....very very sorry about that. Even the Bretonnian non-knights rubbish is better in this game. Sad story. I dropped ToW and rather play WAP or 8th. with some restrictions...
Fair credit for trying to make empire infantry work, Mordian. It's my favorite way to play empire, a line of three infantry regiments stretching across the board. It's the way empire SHOULD be played, in my opinion. Unfortunately, state troops are the worst, most overpriced infantry in the game, and it isn't even close.
State troops could be, across the board, two points cheaper, and they would still be worse than bretonnian men at arms/yeomen guard. And these units are so bad that Bretonnian players aren't building armies around them at tournaments. (I actually did see a yeomen guard bret exiles list recently. He went 0/3). Bretonnians take 0 or 1 MAA units.
All infantry is doing pretty poorly right now in TOW. It's all about speed and power projection, which infantry lack, because it's just a kill points game. All infantry is weak, but empire infantry is atrociously bad. You aren't even really going to do well with empire infantry even if your opponent brings a weak infantry heavy list and you get to push your infantry battle lines together.
It's a shame, because infantry battle lines maneuvering together and grinding it out is in my opinion the peak warhammer experience. But there's just no real place for it on a competitive level. And empire infantry have no place at all. They are pure trash. Will get mulched by equal points of enemy infantry.
Infantry is just bad in old world, state troops are on the bottom end of infantry, sad times. The one thing they do have is that the rest of the army will shoot and force the enemy to come to them, which gives them the opportunity to engage instead of being walked around.
Gors only get frenzy on a roll of a double, not hatred
I agree with your suggestions for optional upgrades for state troops. Except L8 - but Veterans should have LD8. Instead state troops should reduce cost by 1. And Greatswords should have Veteran base.
They are cheap fodder meant to hold positions. The issue is when every unit in the front rank can attack, they just get mowed down where in the past a block of them could actually put up a decent fight into more elite infantry just through sheer weight of numbers and the tricks their characters could pull off in combat. IMHO spearmen are the best unit available as a core choice in the Empire but should only be relied on to block movement. I used to play Warhammer fantasy with probably one of the best Empire players in our region and he always put a strong character in his units. He treated the units as damage sponges while the character (warrior priests usually) wrecked enemy characters (Van Horstman's Speculum) and gave the unit buffs. Meanwhile, cavalry would sweep around the flanks. Imho the best infantry Empire has access to are Flagellants and Greatswords, Spearmen with maybe a couple of Crossbow units are just there to fill your Core requirements.
@@ProxyHammer1 Van Horstman’s Speculum!
What a special kind of rage that could instill in me! Especially when you just had an inkling in your mind that some Sub-100 point wizard was about to wreck your blender of a character that was issuing a challenge…
Honestly I’m rather glad it’s gone, but it did make for a fun psychological thriller for the non-Empire player!
just...no. Wrong.
@@ianreiter835 It was absolutely insane lol 😂
@@stonem0013 State troops have never been good at anything else, I’ve been playing fantasy since 5th edition and they are a means to an end
@@ProxyHammer1 they are definitely not the best core choice for empire atm
Warrior Priests also should be Ld8. They are supposed to rabble raisers and demagogues. Having the same leadership is silly. Then their prayers would actually have a decent chance of doing something. Give War Altar an ability for priests to reroll failed prayers and there you go.
IMO State Troops should have warband. I like your ideas for stubborn etc.
As Empire player myself, i face similar thoughts, and try find a solution.
Here it is: Veteran state troops, 25-30 men strong, Griffin standart, BSB with Warbanner and... 2nd hero, captain at most with GW, supported by mage (battlemagic or demonology)
State troops is NOT for hitting, its for static combat result. They are anvil, and stank/cavs are the hammer.
Special rule 0-1 "Once per game. This unit automatically may chose to pass her break test, even if you need the double 1 to stay." :)
To be honest you need to use characters and use the detachment mechanic to drive state troops to do what they need to do. There are many ways to use detachments to your benefit. You need to figure State troops as regiments with support. Each block should have at least one captain in it and two supporting detachement (one ranged and one melee usually) and they are not the hammer of the army you generally need somehing else as the hammer. Empire is a combined arms army and if you try to run with state troops as the majority of the troops they don't have enough punsh. You need artillery and hammers to do that.
What I have found to make state troops effective and actually able to do damage is to put your General and or Captain on to a Demigryphon. They actually fit nicely in the unit and also help with using less models in the back rank for rank bonuses as well. A six or seve wide spearmen unit then becomes a good unit, throw in a warrior pries as well and it is really tanky and do quite good damage. You don't have more than one regiment in a 2000p game, there simply is not enough points.
Archers in scouting is also prety good for slowing down and/or break up enemy formtions and they can also do some decent damage to certain untis, even if it is only a few wounds here and there.
A captain on a Demigryphon can also leave their unit and go solo once the combat line breaks up, he will be quite good on it's own too. The Demigryph is also good as it has the "First Charge" ability, this also works within a state troop unit if it charges. A cheap survivable Captain on a Demigryph is Halberd/GW, Pistol, Charmed/Enchanted Shield and a luckstone... 2+ save and pretty good dmage output, count as pretty much two models in each of three ranks (FAQ seem to support that). So it is very good economy.
In my opinion State knights are more terrible, they are way too expensive for only having a 3+ save, 3+ saves is so much worse than 2+ saves. Unless you make a fluffy cavalry army you should never use them.
On leadership 8 humans. No, sorry i would happily give you warband, but a +1 yo leadership means that state troops have the same lesdrship as an elf or a dwarf. Nope
Personally I think Horde for halberds and sword and shield. I agree that State troops should need a character for leadership 8.
I think GW likes to overcost the detachment rules, thinking they're the best thing ever since sliced bread and also thinks they are the be all end all of imperial professionalism.
Except that it isn't unique to them anymore.
One of the cool things is, detachments do transfer some paychological effects, like hate.
But nowadays the empire doesn't have easy access to hate anymore, because the Sigmar priest doesn't grant hatred towards everyone anymore.
Now you need a witch hunter, and need to choose between hating undead, hating chaos, or hatimg wizards.
On top of the witch hunter, or any empire character, not being exactly great either.
I hope that GW reacts with the arcane journal, giving us an infantry army that gets such direly needed buffs.
Maybe something like drilled for free and new orders for captains.
WHF/ToW has always had an issue with costing, Everything follows this bizare pattern that a stat increase = +1pt. Light armor is 1pt. A shield is 1pt. Veteran is 1pt. Insert special rule is 1pt. +1T is 1pt. +1ws/BS is 1pt and It seldom strays from this model. The problem is not all stats and additions are equal as you say a 3+/4+ armor save is worth something more. Especially when anything greater than AP-2 is so rare. It really skews for the core troops which are cheap enough to be taken in large numbers. State troops should have base cost 4ppm, but at 5 they're 25% more expensive than they should be.
Furthermore, state troops have no special rules baked into their base cost whereas pretty much every other faction has special rules baked into their base costs. Look at all the other factions and their special rules that provide benefits are not considered into the cost. IF you run the formula using state troops as the base line you'll see my assumptions are accurate when it comes to infantry. Then it's blatantly clear that state troops are shafted and even that extra point makes a difference with such low end units.
Honestly I think in general they should fix the basic infantry by doing something like allowing more ranks to strike back. Now, some armies have a huge advantage (gores for their points for example) and most infantry will do 0 because they've had the front rank whiped by whatever op character/monster wiped the front line. 2 ranks of fighting troops for regular infantry, 3 for spears will already be a good change in my book!
Don’t forget Witch Hunters can buff units - problems with Witch Hunters are terrible rules around choosing their special rule during list building, rather than before game like spells, and terrible armour save.
They suck? Noooooo, who coulda guessed? ;)
Simple fix when the rebalancing comes, the gors need to cost more. They are waaaay undercosted.
I'm gunna try sticking a level 2 wizard with deamonic vessel in a unit of halberdiers, it'll get em up to 2 attacks, S5, AP2, armour bane 1. Can also use the flying spell that gives em I think a 12 inch fly? So could take a unit of like 23 Veteren Drilled Halberdiers, 6x4 rank, use these two spells and go zoom.
Deploy them wider rather than deep to maximise their effectiveness.
@@01001Wintermute Wide with spears, is definitely the best way for infantry to succeed in this edition. Everything else needs to be tough as nails with a damn good armor save to stand a chance.
A wider frontage gets more enemy units charging in.
@@PaulGoldstone-fm2rx It’s certainly not ironclad; but infantry units with spears simply get access to a volume of attacks fewer other units can, especially deployed wide. Beyond that it boils down to your enemy, deployment, and generalship… in scenarios where you’re going to eat 2-3 charges, you may want to spend a previous turn positioning to force a few hard charges (some units could fail) or reform for a smaller front, in order to deny a charging unit any where to contact you.
Though in the nature of this game, even being able to contact corners between units means an entire unit gets to fight- so you have to be careful to not limit yourself too much when you’re dropping your frontage, or to drop that frontage enough that an enemy’s optimized charge is going to wider on each side by one or more, to prevent other units from contacting your front arc.
Waiting for my High Elves!😁 (to join all my old ones)
Its a sad day when Mordian Glory loses faith in the line...pour one out lads
I agree. State troops are just not worth it. I haven't won a single combat with them, despite fielding two blocks of 31 halberdiers with a Priest in several games.
Handgunners are even worse, and were an outright liability. A shame as they are so colourful and should be a basic part of any Empire army.
I thought it was just an editing mistake that Warrior Priests and Sergeants are not Leadership 8. And that they are not automatically Drilled when they are supposed to be drilled professionals is weird.
Medieval handgunners skirmished (in no small part because they had pouches of gunpowder and burning fuses, so standing next to each other was mad! Also being armed with at most a dagger or a kitchen knife was an incentive to run away from someone armed with an actual sword or bloody big axe!!), so I'd allow handgunners to skirmisher and fire & flee. That way you'd see handgunners in front of the halberd blocks, firing at the enemy, then running away behind the safety of the pike block behind - which "looks right".
Halberdiers should be able to Fight in Extra Rank. (Which is also how my Highlands Miniatures halberdiers are depicted, with the front rank holding the halberds low and the second rank ushing their halberds overhead!). So:
Being able to buff to Ld8 is a no-brainer, and I suspect was an editing mistake. should also be Drilled as a basic characteristic.
Handgunner detachments should be able to Skirmish and Fire & Flee.
Allow halberds to Fight in Extra Rank and maybe spears to have Shieldwall.
Excellent. I am happy I am about to paint 40 of them!
@Mordian - Take a block of Greatswords & their state troops detachments get Stubborn which isnt bad!
I think that the Empire infantry needs better armor.
Fluff-wise for this is the rationale that men are just men, but the empire is vast and organised (beyond most other factions capabilities) and to an extent industrialised. And that this allows them to better forge armor in an almost industrial scale.
Thus state troops would have heavy armor with option of buying a shield, and the full plate armor of greatswords is "empire forged full plate" which would be a 3+ armor save.
Also something around the lines of better leadership or an ability like which MG described in the clip.
This way, the average joe is still a crappy nobody but there is a larger chance for the empire troops to atleast get to strike back.
Elves have high WS and I. Dwarves have high WS and T (and often armor saves) and so on. This way the men of the empire would still be average men but somehow get to do something (or try to do something as they still only have 1 attack with poor WS and poor S.
Also the shooting of the empire is really lacklustre. Maybe they could have a rule called "Fire by rank" which allowed them to fire more shots but still with garbage BS, which would be the result of them always training and being a standing army and not a levy.
Also I wish that the empire, like so many other factions, had the ability to unlock taking elite infantry (either flaggellants or preferably because they are cool: greatswords) as core by taking a certain character. Maybe a general of the empire which is on foot would allow the empire player to take greatswords as core.
Currently they are apparantely awful, but with "empire forged full plate" and being taken as core maybe they can start to actually work.
I played the most of my fantasy games in 8th edition in the last 5 years. I still really like it when units get to activate all models in the first and second rank, even after taking casualties.
This thing in TOW which I remember from 6th ed is such a poor game mechanic because it leads to certain players never getting the feeling of actually doing something in combat.
In 8th edition empire state troops were still really poor quality troops, but a 50 man horde of halberdiers with a warriors priest still could actually do something. Now all they can do is die sadly.
The empire isn't organized. It is common for electors to block weapon shipments and supplies to goto empire armies simply because they feel jaded by the emperor.
@@CyrodiilCome The one thing that the Empire of man has that Chaos, orks and beastmen do not have is organisation and industry. That is the Empires main edge against its enemies.
Make a good point, fingers crossed for their arcane journal. Be a tragedy to see them disappear from the table top.
I hate that this happens in all GW games. The meta gets established, people find the myriad of broken things and just take those every time. And it turns out that the new ‘rank and flank’ games does best without either flanks or ranks.
Discard fluff, embrace the gunline.
One of the other things that feels kinda weird about the state troops and other “defensive” troops is that your penalized for doing what your supposed to, receiving charges.
I feel like halberdiers and spearmen, in general, should get something like reverse impact hits, where the enemy can take hits as they charge into a wall of halberds or spears
You get bonuses for being charged in the front with spears. +2 initive (so you'll beat Great weapons)
This is exactly as I remembered WFB. Hopefully OW is actively supported including rules and points tweaks.
To be fair, Empire state troops fill a different role than Gors. Their equivalent would be Ungors not Gors. Empire state troops are suppoed to screen out your range and magic, or allow a cheaky side charge from a knight. Furthermore, Sludgeskin is absolutely broken and shouldn't be held against the empire state troops for not having a direct equivalent
lol, my spears got their asses kicked by clanrats too…. …for three straight games!
I like the proposed changes. I think it would be really neat if you play tested them in some friendly battle reports.
More Captains. They solve panic issues. Empire has fine command and control if you put the leadership in. They're also cheap.
That's another tax on an already overpriced core unit
I'd give them horde and warband. Maybe a different version of warband that still gives the leadership buff but not the reroll to charge. Instead it could brace for a charge for some kind of bonus... Idk.
lets just pray that they give us something to remedy this in the arcane journal.
once upon a time state troops was good
back when empire was the only one with detacthment rules
back when a rank was 4 models
back when a flank charge of 5 models would deny the enemy his rank bonus
back in 3rd, 4th and 5th eddition
28 dudes w spears or halbard, griffon banner (can give state 50p banner if u had a general), 8-10 archers in skirmish formation to block line of sight (skirmish used to do that) and 10 shield bois to deny rank.
stoped playing when they turned empire into topgear (2x tanks and a waralter), thats was before it became monstermadness with hyppoknight galore, back when the state troop defined empire.
Yeah, I like the changes you proposed. They sound cool and it would be interesting to mess with them.
State troops need, Heavy armour, WS4 and Ld 8, with that we can fill in the rest. But saying that GW did fail in the empire rules
I’m all seriousness though, state troops are peak empire for most empire players. I really hope when the full empire book comes out, there will be some rules that seriously buff them.
Add +1WS, add Stubborn for 1pt/ea. and weirdly +1BS on missile troops
What hurt Empire was rolling out their Detachment rule to every tom, dick, and harry.
Before it was the thingbthat made their lackluster state trooper punch abive their weight slightly.
In my opinion, most infantry, but especially light core infantry in this edition is just not efficient as tar pits (holding the line). Only the undead armies with their regen saves, unbreakable and "healing" make efficient tar pits. Unlike 8th edition, TOW is not friendly to infantry generally speaking (excluding some elite options). Characters with items and some specific banners can make infantry better for some armies. But Heroes, fly, swiftstride, monsters and skirmisher infantry do mostly are better at their jobs.
i have Brettonians , Empire and high Elves i feel that empire is underwhelming a bit. even gw admited it that they know the problem.
1. state troops must have shield wall included in their points
2. must have a rule to boost their LD
3. a way for more points to have some access stubborn (maybe a new veteran sergeant character like the grail monk)
state troops right now are a wizard bunker at best or a suicide unit at worst
Hey man! How did you paint your charaters’ blades? I love that blue?
give rank bonus to leadership in all cases up to +4 , it rewards large units
I have an Empire Army for twenty years. I love the Background and Atmosphere of the Empire. But to be honest Statetroops without Support of Heroes or Magical Banners were never really strong fighters for their own. The Basic Rules of TOW for Close Combat and the mediocre Army List make it worse. But i believe in Deus Sigmar that the upcoming Arcane Journal next year and some Infantry friendly Errata can change the Tournament Meta
Empire infantry always depended on detachment countercharge to deny enemy rank bonus in nearly every edition, IMO. Without that they won't beat anything but skeletons & zombies. Remember, trained humans are the bottom of the barrel in WF. Every other race is either long lived enough that militia have more combat experience than any human, or just built for killing. "Professional army" isn't an advantage, it is the minimum to compete vs. Chaos, Orks, Undead, etc.
Not gonna disagree with you on most points but when you talk about character synergy with units, theirs the magical banner that doubles rank bonus on a bsb, i don't think you dabbled with less fighty more buff characters like arch lectors and warrior priests that are designed to buff units. But yeah i think some of the rules lile warband need to be looked at, close order infantry atm feel like they are there to make other stuff look good. They are the literal punching bag of the game.