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.

Hello dakkadakkaians! I have just returned from MFLGS where we had a spirited discussion in regards to multiple topics but all surrounding everyone wishing to return to Fantasy. A big one was the topic of how to make Cavalry relevant in the upcoming edition (if GW stays on the time table that is) and I feel that we came up with several great ideas. Just wanted to post them on here to see what you guys thought and to open the topic to everyone here who wishes that Cavalry were just a little bit better :

-All Cavalry get impact hits. It has always surprised me that Cavalry, in particular heavily armored cavalry such as Bretonnians and Empire Knights did not get impact hits. Being hit by a charge of knights back in the day was the equvilant of a wall of tanks slamming into you so I do not see this as a ridiculous idea. Let us use the Bretonnian Lance formation for example. Lets say a unit of x12 (3x4) charges into a horde unit of beastmen. Thanks to the formations special rule that would mean x9 of the knights (the ones in the front and on the outsides) would get an automatic S5 impact hit. Fitting with the fluff of the Ogres the same rule of rolling a charge distance of 10 or higher would give them all D3 impact hits apiece. This alone would do alot to help balance out the combat resolution that takes place. Monstrous Cavalry would automatically inflict D3 impact hits each due to their massive size and generally small unit size.

-Steadfast rule gets tweaked. I have heard alot of complaints about the shinanigans that is the Steadfast rule and feel that it should be tweaked a little bit. I do think that if a unit gets charged in the front and has more models then the opponent then they should be steadfast (especially if added to the impace hit idea above). However if a unit gets hit in the flank or rear by a unit consisting of at least x2 ranks it automatically loses it/negates it. This would force horde players to actually utilize a litle bit of tactics instead of just chhugging up the field without a care in the world.

-Fast Cavalry get cheaper across the board or actually get weapons/builds to make them relevant. A good example is the Glade Riders for Wood Elves, really 24pts. for a T3 6+ armor save model that has a spear and a single shot S3 bow? Okay first and foremost, drop that down to 15pts. and maybe Ill take it. A good way to fix Glade Riders (in this example) is to give them the Glade Guard bow rule and x2 shots per Glad Rider for the 24pts. This would effectively be a fair and balanced change and you might actually see a few people taking them for once. Things like thise need to be done for all/most fast cav units.

-Oh and just because I can, make magic less OP then it is.

These are just a few ideas but if you guys want to put your own or debate the ones I came up with feel free, thanks for reading guys!

No rank bonus = no Steadfast, cavalry gets ASF on charge.

Done.

 Sigvatr wrote:
No rank bonus = no Steadfast, cavalry gets ASF on charge.

Done.

I like this, simple and straightforward, without overpowering anything either.

 Sigvatr wrote:
No rank bonus = no Steadfast, cavalry gets ASF on charge.

Done.

Perfect.

I don't like the idea that cavalry is impact hits or ASF or any of that stuff. It might be historically fluff, but too many models already have cavalry = speed and armor.

The unit type that is brute force is the new elite MC which nearly every army has now. You start to water down your heavy hitters if you make cavalry about...heavy hitting.

I think Cavalry should maximize what it already has. Speed, armor and (relative) cheapness. Chaos Knights are 1+ armor and 3 attacks for 40, Skullcrushers are 5A 3W 2+ armor for 75 and Special. If you buff the knights too much, you take them over Skullcrushers because they can fit the same role. And a number of other armies are in a similar boat.

Having knights be your flanking and independent fighters kind of makes sense. They're questing! So maybe cavalry counts as +1 ranks and gets a bonus to LD cuz they're all knightly. I don't know. But I don't think they're about smashing stuff. That is the province of MC, MI and MO. They're fast and with insane armor. Fast cav is another story.

Cavalry is perfectly good in the game as it stands, there's no need to try and give it a big boost across the board.

Some cavalry are badly costed, but that's more of a problem with internal army book balance than a problem with external balance between unit types.

Personally, I think the Impact hits make since and here is why. Cavalry need those extra attacks, as even if the steadfast rule was tweaked, they would most likely not break them on the charge still due to the number of guys in the unit and the ranks. Impact hits for Cavalry is a historic fact, and though it would help out certain armies more then others obviously, it would make them more effective. Plus, cavalry charges where supposed to be heavy hitting and are supposed to be feared, as there is only a few things that could stand up to a charge of heavily armored knights.

And I have to disagree tmarlchards. Cavalry is not that good in the game at the moment, as most Cavalry units, even elite ones, have a hard time breaking opponents on the charge, which is made even more harder to do now thanks to the current steadfast rules. Bretonnia in particular NEEDS a boost like Impact hits in order to be more competitive, as right now they are struggling at the moment in doing anything, and are forced to charge multiple lances into a horde in order to break it, which opponents take advantage of.

I've always argued for cavalry impact hits simply because that is the primary purpose of cavalry... to run someone over with a horse. The rider's attacks are somewhat incidental.

I think there needs to be more distinction between Heavy Cav and Fast Cav. Heavy Cav getting impact hits, and Fast Cav getting some sort of 'hit and run' rule would differentiate them best and clearly illustrate their intent and purpose.

Heavy Cav is all about the charge and breaking the target - both in-game and traditionally.

Fast Cav is basicly mounted skirmishers, designed to harass the target rather than kill it.

Historical facts are irrelevant to game balance. A giant is like 30 feet tall. Its scientific fact is anything with a brain is going to avoid it and anything that doesn't is going to die.

The problem with "breaking on the charge" is they are super fast. Their job can't just be breaking stuff on the charge because then that's really really easy for them to do because they are very fast. So it will just be these cavalry missiles shooting at each other and breaking and causing panic. That might be historically true, but it was true in a world without magic and monsters.

If you can march up to a Hydra as a 6pt swordsman, a horse isn't that big of a deal, frankly.

Cavalry Are Relevant. They are point for point better than most ogre models.

Ogre Models are relevant, they are point for point better than most infantry.

Infantry are relevant, they are point for point better than most cavalry.

Maybe it's because of my playstyle, my cav or both of it but I never had a problem with my boar boyz. They wreck havoc nearly every game I play them and I dont see a need for a change. Impact hits would make those guys a bit too strong I guess. Chaos Knights are well, I hate them because with a lord in them they are a real treat at least for my mobz. I read a lot of complains about cav in 8th but I remember the cav from 5th to 7th and I have to say "I dont want to see that again ever!" when I started WHF in 5th chaos knights killed me everytime and it never got better till 8th. Imagine chaos knights with MoK, ASF and impact hits ...
I cant talk a lot about other armies cav since I gave up on Empire when 7th came out and just have a pure DoC khorne army I never used in 8th but I think when certain armies got their new books their cav should be ok.

 Gorbad wrote:
Imagine chaos knights with MoK, ASF and impact hits ...

Goblin on the head, Knights are dead.

I don't see a problem with cav the way it is right now.

8th - fix uberspells and steadfast and then update fix other books and we're good to go

Cavalry in general right now is a lot weaker and most of the time they dont break there opponents on the charge due to the new steadfast rule, which makes it even harder for Cavalry to do just that. Bretonia however needs the Impact hits, as it would make there Lance formation a lot more effective and actually allow a player to get the most of them, since losing one knight causes you to lose a rank, meaning your not going to break them on the charge most likely thanks to your opponents steadfast.

Cavalry right now point for point are pretty good for the most part, however they need to do something to make them more balanced out, Seriously, most of the people I have talked to in person say Cavalry don't need a boost, but turn out to be the players who run big blocks of infantry and don't run Cavalry anymore, or don't want to see Cavalry become good again since they will become a threat to there army. Would be nice to be able to use 1x Bretonnia Lance to take on a big block of infantry again instead of having to use multiple lances to do so. Too many times Players use that against my army and it makes it a whole lot harder for me to do anything.

The Bretonnian megalance (9 Knights Errant with 3 characters in the front rank and a level 4 in there) is pretty good at clearing out Steadfast.

It does a lot of damage, takes very little because of the 3 1+ re-rollable 5++ T4 characters in the front rank and has the full +3 ranks for combat res, so 4 ranks for Steadfast. Unless you're fighting an absolutely enormous infantry unit that still has 5 full ranks after taking a boatload of casualties, you'll be breaking most unit's Steadfast... and if you are fighting enormous units you can quite easily whittle those down with magic/trebs before putting 2 lances in.

Bretonnians do get massively undersold at the moment, at worst they're a top 8 book in terms of power level.

Bretonnians are VERY playable in 8th. They just need maneuvering skill, which a lot of players lack. They just suffer from hard counters such as Lore of Metal and Goblins. I mean, really. Goblins are an auto-lose

I feel it has more to do with the Bretonnia army then just maneuverability mate. Bretonnia can be playable, not denying that, but they do need a lot of help before the become balanced out. Bretonnia Knights, in general, need something to make them more devastating on the charge as they are the Main-Stay of the army, which I think giving them impact hits would be a quick way to fix them as it would make them a whole lot more effective on the charge. This would also help them against horde armies like Goblins, as it would allow them to actually be competitive against armies like those.

Bretonnia Knights need the impact hits to make them more effective, and it would play into the fluff of the lance formation and how Bretonnia Knights are the greatest Cavalry in the Old World. Combining Impact-Hits with the usually point changes, and new Special Characters, Bretonnia needs to get at least 1x or 2x more units to make them more balanced as a whole, which is why I am in favor of Impact Hits for Cavalry. Heck, Empire can run a lot more effective Cavalry army then we can at the moment, which is sad to say the least.

They are, by far, not the greatest cavalry, neither by the rules nor by the fluff. They are normal humans and thus cannot be compared to stuff like Skullcrushers.

The problems with Goblins is not just that we can field viable tarpits. It's mostly for us having a lot of stuff that outright destroys heavy cavalry. Fanatics, Mangler Squigs, Doom Divers, 35 pts Spear Chukkaz etc. make short work of any army that's focused on heavy cavalry.

Goblins also have hard counters, e.g. Skaven as Skaven do everything Goblins do, just better. They are simply superior.

Bretonnia is a cavalry-heavy army and thus suffers from the basic rules, not their army-book in particular, but still, they are a viable army that usually ranks well in tournaments. Far above Goblins, might I add.

 Sigvatr wrote:
They are, by far, not the greatest cavalry, neither by the rules nor by the fluff. They are normal humans and thus cannot be compared to stuff like Skullcrushers.


.

A standard block of grail knights would take pretty serious exception to what you're saying here. GK are the hands down best cav in the game. Tons of str 6 attacks... With the lance formation, they are point for point the best cavalry in the game.

Ragnar4 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
They are, by far, not the greatest cavalry, neither by the rules nor by the fluff. They are normal humans and thus cannot be compared to stuff like Skullcrushers.


.

A standard block of grail knights would take pretty serious exception to what you're saying here. GK are the hands down best cav in the game. Tons of str 6 attacks... With the lance formation, they are point for point the best cavalry in the game.

I think it would be better to do GK in a horde formation and not the lance, that way you could maximize more models in the front rank getting their extra attacks.

 gmaleron wrote:

Ragnar4 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
They are, by far, not the greatest cavalry, neither by the rules nor by the fluff. They are normal humans and thus cannot be compared to stuff like Skullcrushers.


.

A standard block of grail knights would take pretty serious exception to what you're saying here. GK are the hands down best cav in the game. Tons of str 6 attacks... With the lance formation, they are point for point the best cavalry in the game.

I think it would be better to do GK in a horde formation and not the lance, that way you could maximize more models in the front rank getting their extra attacks.

Greatest knights ever...... With Toughness 3.

Ragnar4 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
They are, by far, not the greatest cavalry, neither by the rules nor by the fluff. They are normal humans and thus cannot be compared to stuff like Skullcrushers.


.

A standard block of grail knights would take pretty serious exception to what you're saying here. GK are the hands down best cav in the game. Tons of str 6 attacks... With the lance formation, they are point for point the best cavalry in the game.

T3, 1 wound per model. I don't see them having any problems at all!

welshhoppo wrote:

 gmaleron wrote:

Ragnar4 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
They are, by far, not the greatest cavalry, neither by the rules nor by the fluff. They are normal humans and thus cannot be compared to stuff like Skullcrushers.


.

A standard block of grail knights would take pretty serious exception to what you're saying here. GK are the hands down best cav in the game. Tons of str 6 attacks... With the lance formation, they are point for point the best cavalry in the game.

I think it would be better to do GK in a horde formation and not the lance, that way you could maximize more models in the front rank getting their extra attacks.

Greatest knights ever...... With Toughness 3.

And a 2+ armor save with a 5+ ward. And a minimized frontage that is capable of putting out attacks.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Gorbad wrote:
Imagine chaos knights with MoK, ASF and impact hits ...

Goblin on the head, Knights are dead.

Goblins armies can be outright cheddar to an extend where it is well still funny since I am an O&G player but that doesnt mean other armies would say the same.

I am still on the point, that cav aint that bad in general. Their role changed a lot but I still use them in my army and I still hate chaos knights when I dont play and cheddar all goblin list. Those knights with lord are just a pain to bring down except you have all those nice goblin tools in your list.
So I wont support a cav buff but a buff for certain races. I mean who can really complain about our boarboys? They are by far not the strongest stuff we have but they are good. Same goes for chaos knights and their bigger brothers.

As a skaven player, ive never had the joy of taking cav units, even though ive got my own version (stormvermin on wolf rats)

However, with other armies, i hate cav.
Thats mainly due to playing lizardmen aswell though, where the cav cost an absolute fortune.
Granted, i find them to be of some use when i do take them, but thats usually with 2 characters and a large unit, which points wise is pure evil when a single spell is going to do serious damage to the unit.

I just find them to usually be a large points sink, which i can find much better ways of using.

9th edition should just be 8.5


Monsters: Count as having 2 ranks for all purposes

Being Flanked imposes a -1 modifier on all break tests a unit makes, Steadfast does not ignore this. Similarly, being engaged to the Rear imposes a -2 penelty to break tests. This is not cumulative.

This allows a unit to still be Steadfast, but they'll still have some sort of penelty if flank or rear charged and Monsters will have some rank negation.

Cannons: Against Large Targets, cannons only cause D3 wounds instead of D6.

Ridden Monsters: Templates are randomized between rider and mount. 1-4 hits the mount, 5-6 hits the rider.

Magic: Pit of Shades, Purple Sun, and Dwellers only ignore armor and regeneration saves.

 Rommel44 wrote:
Plus, cavalry charges where supposed to be heavy hitting and are supposed to be feared, as there is only a few things that could stand up to a charge of heavily armored knights.

This is a thing people keep saying. I think it is because they watched Braveheart or something.

Seriously, heavy knights didn't just pile into the front of massive blocks of infantry and just sweep them away. Possibly peasants and the like, but against troops with any kind of training and discipline then a frontal assault was complete madness - the infantry is unlikely to break, then the knights will lose momentum and likely overwhelmed.

Knights were most valued for their ability to crash in to the flanks and rear of already committed enemy units. There they would cause disruption and panic and likely rout the enemy.


With that in mind, the best improvement to bring cavalry, and other fast flanking units back in to the game is to reduce the effectiveness of steadfast when a unit is flanked. Infantry mob in the front, cavalry/some other fast flanking unit in the side = something like actual, real world strategy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Flashman wrote:
I've always argued for cavalry impact hits simply because that is the primary purpose of cavalry... to run someone over with a horse. The rider's attacks are somewhat incidental.

Not really. The horse crashing through the unit wouldn't actually physically run that many people over. People aren't actually so stupid that they'll stand still while a rampaging horse just runs straight at them. But that's actually the real point, by getting all those people to run out of the way the infantry unit's formation is badly compromised.

A charge from a unit of horse was, absent panic is low skilled troops, primarily a weapon of disruption.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 tmarichards wrote:
Bretonnians do get massively undersold at the moment, at worst they're a top 8 book in terms of power level.

The problem with Bretonnians is that they have a handful of powerful builds, all of which are based around the fairly boring mega-unit frontloaded with powerful characters. This isn't a problem for people who like to build a wsingle competitive list and just take that every week, but it is a problem for people who like to mix and match their lists while being fairly competitive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
9th edition should just be 8.5


Monsters: Count as having 2 ranks for all purposes

Being Flanked imposes a -1 modifier on all break tests a unit makes, Steadfast does not ignore this. Similarly, being engaged to the Rear imposes a -2 penelty to break tests. This is not cumulative.

This allows a unit to still be Steadfast, but they'll still have some sort of penelty if flank or rear charged and Monsters will have some rank negation.

Cannons: Against Large Targets, cannons only cause D3 wounds instead of D6.

Ridden Monsters: Templates are randomized between rider and mount. 1-4 hits the mount, 5-6 hits the rider.

Magic: Pit of Shades, Purple Sun, and Dwellers only ignore armor and regeneration saves.

I am absolutely, 100% in agreement.

Cavallery here got mixed up a lot.

When the knights were on their peak it was kinda like "run into those poor peasants and trample them down" but that was before the trained foot soldiers were seen on the battlefield. After that sebsters statement is pretty precise. Might make spears more devastating against frontal charging cav while sword&board suffer more. But that's just an on the fly thought so maybe it would cause some balance issues.

I reckon that being charged by cavalry could add to combat resolution. Think about it, it'd be pretty scary being smashed into by these rapidly moving things that will trample you if you stand in the way or scatter you otherwise. I mean, there's already a combat bonus for charging down a hill. So I think saying that charging cavalry get +2 to their combat resolution, instead of the normal +1 would make things a lot better.