Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So recently I picked up a copy of Sun Tzu's The Art of War. It's an excellent book. For anyone who's unfamiliar with it, The Art of War is one of the oldest and most influential works on military strategy in existence. Mao Zedong, Hồ Chí Minh, General George S. Patton, have all been influenced by it. Napoleon in particular drew heavy influence from it in his near total conquest of Europe, using unconventional tactics and striking where no one expected and taking the enemy by surprise.

Some of the tactics in The Art of War

Know when the fight, and when not to

Strike where the enemy is unexpecting and unprepared

Strike what is weak, avoid what is strong

Make the enemy fight on your terms

If you know yourself and you know your enemy, you need not know the result of 100 battles.

The best form of stratagem is to prevent your enemy's plans. The next best form is to attack the enemy before he can attack you. The worst form is to attempt to a assault heavily fortified position.

The successful general finds victory and then fights. An unsuccessful general fights and then look for victory.

Being aware of the enemy's motivations and plans is the most important element of war and fighting; for it is that in which every other action, including movement, is based upon

While reading this, I could help but think of how Sun Tzu's work may fall into the Warhammer world.

So I thought it might be fun for everyone to attempt to deconstruct their Warhammer armies and analyze them from a strategic point of view.

It's a good book and this is no way meant as a slight to you, but I could read "How to draw manga ponies" and win with daemons. Using the art of war with them is a bit overkill, yes. Don't overthink during a game, take a look make a plan, and ajust accordingly. Have fun watching Firebreathing mushroom daemons fight Vampires riding zombie dragons, and not worry about musty old war tomes.

I tried applying the writings of Sun Tzu to Warhammer. In summation, It was a bit too complicated.

Also, I'll have to agree with sexiest_hero. Daemons are THE most competitive army, bar none. Of course, I mean no offense. They're still a fun army.

Sun Zhu's teachings apply better when you have the more conventional armies facing one another. Empire, elves, lizards, brets all need positional advantage and teamwork.

Demons and VC don't. They ignore so much of the games mechanics and have such powerful units that it really doesn't apply.

Enemy units are almost always weaker, slower, and at a disadvantage in a fight. In most cases you merely have to avoid falling into a trap and you will win, where as your opponent will have to work much harder and a bad roll will sink them.

The Art of War was real handy for commanding an army in 5th century china. I think it's generally less applicable to an abstract simulation of warfare played on a board where if anything runs off the edge it ceases to exist.
Sure, there's some insight in there, but most of it is completely obvious.

You tend to lose a lot of the teachings of Sun Tzu when you're confined to a set table-space and armies are intended to be balanced points-wise (not getting into a discussion about strong lists - it's already been done to death). There's no real element of surprise in WFB either as both players see where all the enemy units are (barring a couple of units), and even then, you know that they exist and have the chance to set up accordingly.

bdub77 wrote:

Know when the fight, and when not to

Oh look! Daemons! Vampire Counts! I'm not going to fight them...

bdub77 wrote:

Strike where the enemy is unexpecting and unprepared

You're squared off against each other. Armies are completely visible. This might apply
to magic items and such, but those become known variables once the army books have
been out for some time.

bdub77 wrote:

Make the enemy fight on your terms

I get 500 more points, yeah?

bdub77 wrote:

If you know yourself and you know your enemy, you need not know the result of 100 battles.

Truth. Many things are known on the Warhammer Fantasy battlefield.

bdub77 wrote:

The best form of stratagem is to prevent your enemy's plans. The next best form is to attack the enemy before he can attack you. The worst form is to attempt to a assault heavily fortified position.

Flat battlefields mostly.

bdub77 wrote:

The successful general finds victory and then fights. An unsuccessful general fights and then look for victory.

Probably this is the most relevant advice (and the vaguest). This is why Static Combat
Resolution is so important in WFB. It's not a variable in determining combat winners.

bdub77 wrote:

Being aware of the enemy's motivations and plans is the most important element of war and fighting; for it is that in which every other action, including movement, is based upon

I'd probably apply this to the meta game. If you're both playing to win with top lists, then
don't frown for facing a cheesy list.

The problem with Sun Tzu in this context is he mostly talks about strategy (that is, movement of forces on a large scale) whereas Warhammer is a game of tactics. The Art of War doesn't have a great deal of tactical advice. (Which is one reason why it's a classic -- strategy tends to be timeless, tactics vary hugely with circumstances.)

Also, since there's almost no hidden information in Warhammer, an enormous amount of "real world" military thinking doesn't apply. You can't sneak up, steal a march, screen, feint, etc.

The art of war applies to fantasy but it is before the turn begins not afterwards. It is stragecal not tactical which means that you need to have a very good plan before you start placing your first unit down. It is a very complicated book and requires lots and lots of studying for you to get any advantage out of it.

For people who want to improve their game this book would be a good way to start. Thanks for mentioning this book and posting it.

I dunno, I think for people who are looking to improve their game, time spent playing it would be better than time spent pouring over the Art of War.

Well practice only helps if there is a strategy to it. If you are just trying the same thing over and over again expecting to do better just because you "practiced" I doubt your win percentage increases much if at all. Other than tickling the OCD that gamers tend to have (WoW and Warhammer AoR anyone?), playing lots of games without a program to it will not improve your game. Reading military theory and books on tactics THEN practicing is more effective. Art of War is a fine read for the basics of strategy. Plus its easier to find time for 1 person reading a book than two people with time for a game.

for those who cant figure out how to work Sun Tzu into warhammer here are the cliff-notes. or coles-notes since im in canada

'Know when to fight'
its primarily about fleeing and refused flank tacticts. Dont fight a combat or put a unit in a dangerous position if it has no purpose.

'Strike where the enemy is unexpecting'
Duh, if the enemy is unexpecting you win. And if your opponent is unprepared you'd better beleive he's unexpecting. The point is dont be predictable, and force your opponent to make bad choices, when he exposes the flank of his unit have someone ther to take advantage of that.

'Strike what is weak'
Dont fight hammerers, greatswords, graveguard, or daemons unless you are prepared to kill them all. Attack the weaker points of his army, try to weaken the stronger points either through shooting, magic or by having greater strength.

'Fight on your terms'
its all about initiative, not letting your enemy tell you when and how to fight. if you have a defensive army channel your opponent through your shooting, into one on one fights. if you have a fast army, dont let your enemy charge you, hit fast where you have the most advantage.

'Know thyself'
remember what's in your army, remember what it can do and know how it works against your enemy. it has been said that warhammer is a game of known variables. Solve for those variables. you cant know what is in store without checking, know who your playing against and confirm suspicions whenever possible. How do you know the DE sorceress has a pendant (reverse ward save) if you dont check?

'Disrupting your enemies plans'
counter your opponent. if you can do so without killing a single model all the better. Either through dispelling a crucial spell or holing a flank with an unbreakable unit, you can stop your enemy from acheiving his goals. attack fast so you cannot be countered, keep the initiative and dont let up the pressure. Many games have come out a draw because of timid playing.
Fortification in warhammer is done by castling you units on a hill or channeling a foe into one on one fights with heavy infantry, dont get into a protracted combat in these situations, look for a way around them.

'Find victory then fight'
Plan your battles when you build the army, plan when setting up terrain, plan when choosing spells, plan during the game. finish before you start. if you dont know what youre going to do on turn two before you set up.

'Aware of motives'
no one does something for no reason. Think about the consiquences of yours and your opponents actions.

i recommend reaading the Art of Warhammer series by Jeff Leong begining in the american WD 291. it was written for 6th Ed but the principals are the same, just watch the details.

Most of the Art of War is how to gain a logistical advantage over your opponent. Ie. getting more points than him.

Seriously. Reading any one of the numerous (free) online tactica would be more use.
The Art of War is an interesting read, definitely. But as a way to get better at warhammer it's a bit convoluted and pointless.

Also, repeating the same game over and over? Where did I suggest that? Don't cherrypick my argument please.

Da Boss wrote:Most of the Art of War is how to gain a logistical advantage over your opponent. Ie. getting more points than him.

Seriously. Reading any one of the numerous (free) online tactica would be more use.
The Art of War is an interesting read, definitely. But as a way to get better at warhammer it's a bit convoluted and pointless.

Also, repeating the same game over and over? Where did I suggest that? Don't cherrypick my argument please.

Most of the free online tacticas are complete crap. It may seem like the author(s) know what they are talking about, and what they do does work to a limited extent. Most of the authors also have extreme prejudices towards certain units, style of play, and the meta game. Reading information on basic strategy is much better than reading about what little somebody else learned about a particular army and how they like to play it. Sure it's a nice shortcut to winning a few games, and it is useful for researching armies, but you will get more mileage out formulating your own opinion.

Also I'm not really sure what you mean by "cherry picking" a one line argument. I simply said that playing the game does nothing if there is nothing behind it. Your post was an oversimplification, and I cautioned about the perils of thinking that quantity of effort is more important than quality.

Just playing games is fine if you are just starting out and don't really grasp the rules and mechanics. I'm sure most of the people here are past this part of the game. Most people here are also past reading Art of War too, as it is as basic as it gets: If you want to win, don't play fair.

I've seen the arguement here that bringing more points is much of what AoW is about, and how it doesn't really apply to war hammer normally. I would have to disagree with this attitude. Looking through various books its not hard to see the fact that certain units and armies are grossly under priced, or negate many armies underlying strengths. Daemons have ward saves, and will die to a S3 wound as easily as a s10 wound. How many points more did a player pay for the S10? VC and TK can bring reinforcements. Elves can be very mobile and can pick apart big block armies with ease. HE can negate much of the advantage of getting the charge. The DE hydra is undercosted, and dragons/greater daemons in general aren't balanced for normal games. Army and list selection is how you can get a point advantage, even if the advantage is just "virtual" or hidden.

What I meant is that if there are several ways a statement can be taken, and you take the dumbest/easiest to rebutt, and ignore the others, you are cherrypicking.

I would posit that free online tactica are generally a lot better for teaching you to be better at warhammer than the Art of War. Even if they are crap.

Your argument about paying extra points for S10 and the other list specific problems are fine and dandy if you know what you are facing and have agreed to tool up against it beforehand. In a tournament environment however, you have to face many different lists. That S10 might not be useful against Ward Saves, but it's certainly a godsend vs. 1+ armour saves or chariots, and you can't be sure of which ones you'll be facing.

When you make an unclear statement of opinion that can be interpreted in many ways, don't be surprised when people take the wrong interpretation, or correct an over generalization.

The only time I've heard the term cherry picking is when somebody is whining about something. Its a nice redirection of attention, for people who screwed up or feel put upon. You stated your opinion, I stated your opinion was overly general, and then gave mine. I was not picking on you or cherry picking arguments.

Tooling up before hand is how you can gain advantage. You do not have to list tailor against a specific opponent to do this. Squeezing the last point out of every selection you make, and taking units that counter the most common power builds is one of the easiest ways you can gain a virtual points advantage. For example: In both the casual and the tourney meta game there is a large number of fear causing armies being played. This makes the value of ItP higher, and negates the value of stubborn (unless you are ItP of course). Stubborn is a very good ability, but its an ability that is usually worthless vs what is actually being played.

I disagree with your statement about tooling up for a tournament. The people who do well at large events have fully tooled out and tweaked lists. They don't tool up for beating the crap army builds (which are the majority), they tool up to beat the handful of lists that are at the same level. They take units/options that are terrible against some of the worst armies, but are great vs what they will actually face. This is because the majority of armies don't show up anyways. (this is why sometime you will see random armies like dwarves in the top brackets, their lists are very specifically meant to beat what they expect to face, and nobody is ready for them)

If you list tailor vs a friend in a casual (as in for fun) game, they you are just being a jerk. I do have a funny story about that though. My usually opponent had just gotten VC together, and wanted to play them vs my DE, we planned on playing in advance. This was also a challenge league game. My opponent knew that last time I took DE vs a VC player I killed him down to 4 models with just shooting/magic, with only 1 combat fought the whole game. He was worried about me list tailoring, or just shooting him to death, and so he took his WoC knight spam (with a dragon) instead. The idea that it would have the charge range to pick off my ranged units. I just kinda laughed at his miscalculation. 1 level 4 and 2 level 2 wizards, Dark riders, bolt throwers, 1 hydra and crossbowmen and black guard was my list. 2 whole units of knight just died to number 6 in lore of metal. His marauders horsemen died to shooting, and my army just danced around the dragon. The dragon did get rid of the bolt throwers, and a crossbow unit. It did not get its points back before getting shot down. By a rending star assassin no less. At the end of the game my opponent had 3 knights and a wounded lord minus a dragon. When he finally played his VC (big black knight block with the regen banner) vs my same list, he slaughtered me. If he hadn't list tailored vs me, he would have won the league game.

I think your defense of my use of the phrase cherry picking is pretty fun, but I'm sticking with what I said. I said "spend more time playing" this may not be a completely airtight statement, but anyone who doesn't want to find fault with it can read it and say "And obviously learn from experience rather than repeating the same mistakes over and over again ad nauseum". The game is simple enough that the post game analysis most players do will easily be enough to see improvement- there's just no need to spend ages pouring over the Art of War to get a deeper insight. Read it if you are interested, but as a way to get better at warhammer I still maintain it's convoluted and inefficient as all hell.

As to tooling your list for a tournament, often the top tier lists are quite different to each other in terms of what makes them good, and therefore what you have to bring to stop them. Fantasy is currently in an abberant stage where Fear causing armies make immunity to psychology much more useful than it was, but that's the only thing I can think of.

I think that you can tailor your list for a fun game if both players have agreed to do so. It can make for some really different, fun games if approached in the right mindset.