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.

I love the Trenchers, mainly because of their look, their fluff and how it is a cheap soldier who aren't just thrown into the meatgrinder with a flashlight and cardboard armour, but are valued soldiers, who may not be very experienced, but are still seen as people worth protecting. I have something for the average person fighting battles without any cool magical abilities, but just their gear, their friends and their will to survive. Therefor, when I began collecting my models for WARMACHINE, I thought of having a Trencher-heavy force, with Infantry, Commandos, Master Gunners, Grenadiers (The coolest looking 'Jack around), some Chainguns maybe and possibly Captain Maxwell. I plan on p'haps using a Hunter and the Gun Mages with UA at the side, or/and some Sword Knights with a heavy 'Jack so they'll get their flanking.

I have, however, been looking around on foras and such, and most I see discussing the Trenchers (Especially the Infantry) are rather hostile towards them, entitling them as anything from confused to utter useless. This makes me a very, very sad panda. I know that WARMACHINE is all about synergy, and I will find a use for each of these guys in my future list.

Now, here is what you should pay attention to - How do you feel about the Gravediggers? What 'Caster works best with them (I personally think Kraye or Seige)? Is there something/someone that I should be using to help them do their job (please don't say Long Gunners, those dudes are ugly as hell)?

I'll patiently await your answers!

There are themed lists for Cygnar Trenchers in the Forces book, which makes them really good tbh..

For casters I would recommend Siege Brisbane, fits in with the background and he's really cool

I think this thread may help you understanding the balance of Warmahordes, as I thought the same about the trenchers as well

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/577074.page

Hope this helps

Trenchers and their addons were one of the units I tested a lot. Sadly there is nothing there too fix them other then praying that one day they may be a 4/6 unit and the UA being 2pts.

They do nothing to stealth , they do nothing to armor , they are bad at shoting non stealth targets and are very bad at melee ,their support pices either work better without actual trenchers.
A grenadier with rune shot from GM and two master guners is a fun ,if casual, bounce stuff around modul .
Their AD makes them die faster and their dig in doesn't work most of the time . It is sad that they are both bad and high cost at the same time . I was told that it happened , because of good they were durning the pre MkII testing phase . PP uped their cost and then nerfed them , but forgot to drop the too high cost .

Trencher commands on the other hand are cygnars only stealth unit , if Finn was an UA for them or had buff that actualy works , they may even be an interesting units . Sadly compering to the realy good cygnar units like rangers/gunmages or mercs cygnar can run , they are never taken . Which again is a sad thing , because they have interesting fluff and cool models.

People I know who play trenchers, particularly their infantry, say that their issue is that they pay too much of a 'utility tax' to be worth it. They have a lot of abilities, but they pay too much for them and are spread too thin. Like everything in Warmachine you can make them work, but you have to build around them, and I don't think that you can just spam trenchers and have the list be effective. That being said I have minimal first hand experience with them, so if anybody who has run them has more useful advice focus on that.

RegalPhantom wrote:
People I know who play trenchers, particularly their infantry, say that their issue is that they pay too much of a 'utility tax' to be worth it. They have a lot of abilities, but they pay too much for them and are spread too thin. Like everything in Warmachine you can make them work, but you have to build around them, and I don't think that you can just spam trenchers and have the list be effective. That being said I have minimal first hand experience with them, so if anybody who has run them has more useful advice focus on that.

My general plan is to care for the little buggers. They've got some neat abilities, but they are just young men and woman who have just enlisted in the Cygnarian Army - I can't expect them to be amazing by themselves! Something to buff their gunnery, and a lot of distractions (Commandoes should be pretty annoying to the enemy's infantry, and a Sword Knight/Centurion combo should soak some damage too!) and of course WAs and Maxwell to give them another distraction, along with the Inspiration.

The problem is that no matter how you care for them, they fold like a card table in melee, and really don't shoot that much.

It's a shame, but the only real reasons to take them are advanced deploy, dig-in, and smoke bombs.

If you want to take them just to block LOS, there are worse ways to spend six points, but I'm still not sold on them.

Trenchers are supposed to be more of a board control unit, the problem the internet has with them is that A) they are expensive and B) since some stuff has hunter or eyeless sight therefore everything does?.

Therefore most armies can get around their "tricks" making less useful. However I still think they are good unit just one that need a little finesse. One thing I have noticed from my own experience with them is that when someone knows they are going up against Cygnar, they don't expect trenchers. The expect things like gunmages w/ UA or lots of mercs but not trenchers. So they don't necessarily bring all their units with hunter, or guns that do AOEs that do something beyond blast (blast damage is all you need to kill gunmages). One example is that Cyrx players will opt for maybe bane knights over thralls due to gunmages being what they expect even though thralls might have been the better choice against trenchers but not gunmages. Another example from an actual game I played is that against a Ret player he opted for the battle mages over the strike force, there was very little the battle mages could do against def 17.

As far how to run them, I have good success using them with dead eye casters like Kara and the Haley(s). I am sure pCaine could run them well (I don't personally own him). Dead eye IMO fixes the big issue the unit has, which is accuracy. You need some sort of buff on trenchers for them to really go to work on the offense. The Snipe spell helps but it is mainly dead eye. Casters that don't offer trenchers any buffs that they can't already bring themselves, like siege, are better off leaving trenchers at home and taking something else. Siege even though fluff wise is supposed to run with trenchers, he doesn't offer the unit anything that they actually need. Kraye the other warcaster you mentioned I wouldn't bother with them either, he once again doesn't offer them anything they actually need.

With Kara for example with dead eye and her feat firing squad each trencher has 5+4d6 (average of 19) to hit and the pow on the gun is more than enough to kill most basic infantry.

When I run them with Kara I usually bring the min unit with the UA and then build Kara's battlegroup to tackle heavies (with things like hunters or defenders). The trenchers help control the battlefield and kill any infantry in sight. If you do take them, the UA plus a grenade porter is superior to 4 more grunts in the unit. The Sniper guy is VERY useful to have to snipe out certain models or finish off a certain spiral/columns on a warbeast/warjack. Also he has higher rat, which is important due to CRA. The order on the officer is money in the bank if your opponent doesn't have hunter. Though the order Cautious advance is somewhat of a trap since you HAVE to do a combat action so it means no dropping smoke.

I would say one key thing for actually playing the unit, it is supposed to be the front line unit for cygnar, the vanguard, so don't feel bad walking up to point blank range and gunning down bane thralls or making use of the assault order. Also first few times I played them I had no idea how to use them since there isn't a lot of advice for them other than that they suck. So it did take me a little while before I got them to where I wanted. Also trenchers really need something else as a second wave behind them. My current theory with trenchers is to take forgeguard or stormblades w/ a stormclad and follow the them up. Anything that that runs to engage trenchers gets whacked over the head with a hammer and the trencher goes back to shooting stuff.

On the point cost issue, one thing I have noticed for ranged infantry is that if you have combined range you are at minimum a 5/8 unit. If you have combined range AND several other tricks/abilities than you are more expensive than that. Trenchers have too many tricks up their selves as unit to be cheap IMO.

I find Trenchers have a severe case of "Master of None" Syndrome. They have two different special actions, the Assault Order, and their Rifle.They pay for all four, however-

1) Dig in kills mobility in a game which really likes mobility and melee. Also, because it requires and action, it means you aren't using your rifle to shoot someone. So you've either got no nearby enemies, or you are about to be charged, meaning dig-in is useless anyways. Also, because you aren't moving, you are wasting your good speed stat. Admittedly, it is useful for deployment, in order to make sure that you don't die on your opponents first turn.

2) Assault means that you can't CRA. Combined with the Trenchers low RAT, and you are not going to hit your target.Also, again you are not taking advantage of your various other actions.

3) High speed, Smoke grenades, and Advanced deploy work well together, giving you a pretty good screening unit. However, because you are paying for Assault, Dig-in, and a Rifle, the unit ends up costing at least as much as what you are screening. And honestly, they still kinda suck against any of the things that ignore cloud effects, as well as only having defence 15 vs shooting.

That being said, I have had success running a small unit as a screen- it's kind of expensive, but I am basically sacrificing 6pt to dictate what my opponent kills first. Make sure to run them with a caster who can buff their Def vs range (Blur, Deceleration, Deflection, etc.), just to give your opponent a headache with removing them. Your opponent won't (easily) kill them at range, and when you get close your opponent can choose between wiping them out (easily) in melee and letting you get the drop on their melee unit, or not attacking and letting you get the drop on their entire army. When the time comes, fix bayonets, give the assault orders, and try to take a few enemy infantry models with you.

Of course, this is all wrecked if your opponent is running Everblight, fire/corrosion AoE's, Mage Hunters with UA, anything which ignores concealment, etc.

 Blood Hawk wrote:
Trenchers are supposed to be more of a board control unit, the problem the internet has with them is that A) they are expensive and B) since some stuff has hunter or eyeless sight therefore everything does?.

Therefore most armies can get around their "tricks" making less useful. However I still think they are good unit just one that need a little finesse. One thing I have noticed from my own experience with them is that when someone knows they are going up against Cygnar, they don't expect trenchers. The expect things like gunmages w/ UA or lots of mercs but not trenchers. So they don't necessarily bring all their units with hunter, or guns that do AOEs that do something beyond blast (blast damage is all you need to kill gunmages). One example is that Cyrx players will opt for maybe bane knights over thralls due to gunmages being what they expect even though thralls might have been the better choice against trenchers but not gunmages. Another example from an actual game I played is that against a Ret player he opted for the battle mages over the strike force, there was very little the battle mages could do against def 17.

As far how to run them, I have good success using them with dead eye casters like Kara and the Haley(s). I am sure pCaine could run them well (I don't personally own him). Dead eye IMO fixes the big issue the unit has, which is accuracy. You need some sort of buff on trenchers for them to really go to work on the offense. The Snipe spell helps but it is mainly dead eye. Casters that don't offer trenchers any buffs that they can't already bring themselves, like siege, are better off leaving trenchers at home and taking something else. Siege even though fluff wise is supposed to run with trenchers, he doesn't offer the unit anything that they actually need. Kraye the other warcaster you mentioned I wouldn't bother with them either, he once again doesn't offer them anything they actually need.

With Kara for example with dead eye and her feat firing squad each trencher has 5+4d6 (average of 19) to hit and the pow on the gun is more than enough to kill most basic infantry.

When I run them with Kara I usually bring the min unit with the UA and then build Kara's battlegroup to tackle heavies (with things like hunters or defenders). The trenchers help control the battlefield and kill any infantry in sight. If you do take them, the UA plus a grenade porter is superior to 4 more grunts in the unit. The Sniper guy is VERY useful to have to snipe out certain models or finish off a certain spiral/columns on a warbeast/warjack. Also he has higher rat, which is important due to CRA. The order on the officer is money in the bank if your opponent doesn't have hunter. Though the order Cautious advance is somewhat of a trap since you HAVE to do a combat action so it means no dropping smoke.

I would say one key thing for actually playing the unit, it is supposed to be the front line unit for cygnar, the vanguard, so don't feel bad walking up to point blank range and gunning down bane thralls or making use of the assault order. Also first few times I played them I had no idea how to use them since there isn't a lot of advice for them other than that they suck. So it did take me a little while before I got them to where I wanted. Also trenchers really need something else as a second wave behind them. My current theory with trenchers is to take forgeguard or stormblades w/ a stormclad and follow the them up. Anything that that runs to engage trenchers gets whacked over the head with a hammer and the trencher goes back to shooting stuff.

On the point cost issue, one thing I have noticed for ranged infantry is that if you have combined range you are at minimum a 5/8 unit. If you have combined range AND several other tricks/abilities than you are more expensive than that. Trenchers have too many tricks up their selves as unit to be cheap IMO.

^This is the best answer - And not because it isn't negative!

So, remember that they dispensable, make sure they get to shoot stuff better with their rifles and generally keep the unit small, and you believe it'll work?

When in doubt, proxy.

Though I've also been known to get models just because they look cool and would be fun to convert/paint. That is the main reason I ended up with a 35 point Menoth army LOL.

With Kara for example with dead eye and her feat firing squad each trencher has 5+4d6 (average of 19) to hit and the pow on the gun is more than enough to kill most basic infantry.

You can get the same gun on a ranger and have better army utility and just as good defense as dig in , maybe even better because you don't have to be static to get the bonus .

Makumba wrote:You can get the same gun on a ranger and have better army utility and just as good defense as dig in , maybe even better because you don't have to be static to get the bonus .

Rangers are a good unit, however my experience they die horribly to blast damage, while trenchers don't. Also having to be static and therefore not using dig as much is fixed if you run the UA.

Rangers are also cheaper then Trenchers, and are better then jamming with AD, Pathfinder, and spd7.

Both have good and bad sides, but there's a reason Rangers are seen as "good" and trenchers are seen as "bad."

I remember the first time I fought against a Trencher list.

It was hard as hell going against them and Siege. I lost in the end, but I like to think that I lost with honour. All those smoke clouds really did a number on me, and there were very few ways that I could attack back.

But in his next game he fought against Legion of Everblight. That was a one sided slaughter against the trenchers because of eyeless sight.

Moral of the story, Trenchers are very good against something, but very bad against others.

If you run Trenchers then I think you need to decide what you want them to do. If you just want a smoke wall unit that screens something like a unit of Storm blades run the min unit if you want to use them offensively then take a min unit and UA.

The first option can be run with any caster the 2nd option has more optimal caster choices or will need other things in the list to make it work.

So casters with access to Dead eye (pCaine, pHaley, eHaley, Sloan) or Dead eye and Snipe (pCaine) would be the best casters to run without the traditional support they need.

Otherwise you will be looking at Rangers and/or Maxwell Finn to up their ability to hit anything at Range.

As others have said they have weaknesses so stuff that ignores clouds, continuous effects on AOEs and sprays ignore being dug in and as they are small based models there is always the the threat of being trampled over.

My mate fields Trenchers often, and have enjoyed great success with em, at least when facing me...

They either dig in and get high def and become a pain to remove from a distance, or they form up and do a cra against something I thought safe.

They have even gotten caster assasinations sometimes, because I dismissed them as silly units. Cue CRA, and dead caster :(

So, here is a compilation of what I've learned so far.

You can't just field Trenchers and expect them to do great. You need to have a plan with them, and make sure you use them for that plan.
Trencher Infantry is very expensive, so a minimum unit should be considered over a large one.
Trenchers can be really annoying to remove when Dug In and when they are using Smoke Bombs, and provide a good unit to screen the rest of the army.
Trencher Infantry doesn't kill well outside of CRAs and the Sniper. Spells like Deadeye and Snipe can help them kill, while Maxwell and Rangers can boost their hitting range.
Trenchers shouldn't be expected to survive a combat - They are a speed bumb to the enemy, and if they die, the enemy isn't fighting your big dudes.
Commandoes can spell death to all infantry with their Anatomical Precicion and Scatterguns.
The Cannon isn't all that powerful in comparison to the Hunter, Defender and Avenger.
The Chaingun can kill Infantry very well, but not as well as a Cyclone.
Mastergunner + Trenchers with 3x Rifle grenades + Grenadier + Cannon = 6 AeOs with very good accuracy.
Maxwell is a beast in close combat, but tends to die because of his rather low health.
The choice of 'Caster is very, very important, as the 'Caster have to be boosting the Trenchers (Especially Infantry) to make it work with greater Synergy.

Did I miss anything?



By the by, I feel like there isn't really a 'Caster who helps out Trenchers really well. ECaine might help, but I feel we need a true Trencher Warcaster - Not Seige, that dude might be ex-Trencher, but he doesn't seem like he actually helps them all that well.

A Trencher Warcaster would be fuckin' beast.

Actually, pStryker could work well with Trenchers turning them into mega tarpits or giving them the range to pepper the enemy that they need.

I'm holding out for either eSiege or Haley3 (when they come) to be Trencher casters. Preferably Haley3 IMO.

Trenchers are bad in that they're overcosted, they just get less work done than comparable points spent elsewhere. They're not flailingly-helpless models in the 40k sense of the term "Bad", they'll do stuff effectively just not quite enough to be generally considered efficient. Basically so long you as you have a plan for all the things you need to have a plan for, and an understanding of how you intended win you'll do fine. You might need a bit more of a skill lead over your opponent or a more more dice luck to win than if you weren't trying to incorporate trenchers heavily into that plan, but choosing to go that route is hardly condemning yourself to nothing but losses.