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.

sebster wrote:

What are you talking about?

Essentially you have actually been agreeing with me all along, but commented on such as a disagreement, so I tried to reword everything to say the same thing a different way in an attempt to clarify.

This could have been sorted if you said you agreed rather than you disagreed with earlier comments, because we are on the same page just using different phrases to describe the same solution.

Don't forget the trusty War Altar. Equip your pope with a speculum, a 1+ rerollable armor save, and a great weapon, and enjoy having a 4+ ward from the wagon plus being unbreakable (and MR3 for whatever that's worth these days). This is most effective by far against Warriors of chaos, since they have to challenge ,and your pope becomes a powerful chaos lord while the chaos lord becomes a very meh 2-attack loser, and not as effective against armies that can spam large numbers of high-strength attacks (Savage orcs, ironguts, grave guard).

Remember also that your arch lector or any other priest within twelve inches can heal the pope AND his wagon up to full wounds by casting a single bound spell level 4. So if somebody gets a couple wounds through, no big deal.

Also the lore master light helps... and 18" Inspiring Presence

Orlanth wrote:Essentially you have actually been agreeing with me all along, but commented on such as a disagreement, so I tried to reword everything to say the same thing a different way in an attempt to clarify.

This could have been sorted if you said you agreed rather than you disagreed with earlier comments, because we are on the same page just using different phrases to describe the same solution.

Basically, in summary;
Stuff we agree on - you ought consider reforming units based on the opposition, looking to ensure steadfast (while denying the same to enemy) without going so narrow that you maintain surplus ranks that will not be needed over the course of the battle.
Stuff we disagree on - you have argued that you reform only once, I have pointed out that while reforming in combat can be tricky, you shouldn't deny yourself the option entirely.

sebster wrote:

Orlanth wrote:Essentially you have actually been agreeing with me all along, but commented on such as a disagreement, so I tried to reword everything to say the same thing a different way in an attempt to clarify.

This could have been sorted if you said you agreed rather than you disagreed with earlier comments, because we are on the same page just using different phrases to describe the same solution.

Basically, in summary;
Stuff we agree on - you ought consider reforming units based on the opposition, looking to ensure steadfast (while denying the same to enemy) without going so narrow that you maintain surplus ranks that will not be needed over the course of the battle.
Stuff we disagree on - you have argued that you reform only once, I have pointed out that while reforming in combat can be tricky, you shouldn't deny yourself the option entirely.

You reform once in light of the possibility you may not be able to reform later, not as a doctrine to prevent further reforms if you can.