What's up with the shooting mentality?

[brechttomme]

Hello fellow Asrai!

Recently, I have been watching a lot of battle reports and reading forum threads, and particularly about the MSU shooting list, as that's the direction I want to take my army in. Now, once in a while it pops up that people really resent playing against these kinds of lists, mostly any with (quite a lot of) shooting in general. Out of curiosity, I'd like to ask if anyone could demonstrate or at least reveal to us their reasons for this, saying that its not fun for both players. Personally I think its a really fun way to play, albeit only having just 2 games under my belt; but I love how you have to be one step ahead of the game and really have to think a lot more than when just shoving forward big blocks of troops. Not to say that this is a bad playstyle of course, to each their own. To me, its just is more enjoyable to beat an opponent knowing that you have played a better game than him/her tactically, rather than relying on your superior lists and statlines and random dice rolling.

So, not intended as an insult to anyone of course (I apologize if I have offended anyone), but would anyone care to explain why they don't like playing against static (i.e. Dwarf) or dynamic (i.e. Wood Elf) "gunlines"? It would give me some more insight into why the people complain about it .

[MyNameDidntFit]

In my experience, it's actually exactly the opposite of what you said about skill. I know that playing my Warriors of Chaos against my friend's [now defunct due to boredom on both sides] Dwarf army, every game came down to how well his ranged weapons rolled T1 and 2. If he rolled well, I lost. If he rolled poorly, I won. It wasn't fun for either of us and resulted in his Dwarfs being shelved.

I'm the only WE player in my group and they've been shelved in light of the new WoC book so I can't really say about people resenting playing against WE bowlines.

[ryanabt]

I can only speak from the perspective of an avoidance MSU shooting army, so this doesn't apply to a leafblower list.

I think that the problem comes from the initial response to a MSU shooting heavy army. When someone first plays such an avoidance list, they may win, but they probably did very little malee killing. If they lost, which is fairly common when you surprise them with that type of list, then they never got to do the stuff they play warhammer to do (ie smash something in combat). Instead, they played someone who avoided that and controlled the game in a way that was all to their own advantage.

It is this type of game that leads someone to say that MSU avoidance/shooting armies are not fun to play against.

HOWEVER, if you play people regularly, they will discover the fun, and huge strategic advantage, of playing a game that focusses on ALL aspects of the game. One that makes someone work for melee and feel rewarded when they are able to get into melee. While I don't play that style all the time (I also play an all Orc army), my regular opponents enjoy our games because they see the strategy in it and feel a sense of accomplishment when they beat me (wish this was more rare).

[brechttomme]

HOWEVER, if you play people regularly, they will discover the fun, and huge strategic advantage, of playing a game that focusses on ALL aspects of the game. One that makes someone work for melee and feel rewarded when they are able to get into melee. While I don't play that style all the time (I also play an all Orc army), my regular opponents enjoy our games because they see the strategy in it and feel a sense of accomplishment when they beat me (wish this was more rare).

Indeed, this is how I also feel about it (and I also wish you didn't lose that much ). I can see how MyNameDidntFit (haha, nice nickname) explains that playing against a static gunline can be monotonous, but isn't that just another aspect of the game? Maybe as WoC (not trying to criticize you) it just means you have to think more about using terrain and different unit types (like cavalry to get there faster). But how you show it just depends on the first two turns of shooting, I can see it'd be boring to play against as the enemy is likely not moving and not using tactical skill to beat you. In that case I can agree.

But the dynamic Wood Elf "bowline" seems the complete opposite of that to me. You say that people don't like it because they can't get into combat and roll dice and smash the Elves up, but isn't there more to Warhammer than just rolling dice? I would think it as a fun opponent because you need to primarily win in the movement phase, as you will win combat anyway. So, instead of rolling handfuls of dice (combat) it's all about tactically positioning your troops (movement). Is this the main problem? That people only really enjoy the game when they can get into combat and punch Elves in the face (doesn't seem very fun from a Wood Elf perspective)?

Just curious of course, not trying to be offensive

[Ishamael]

I find it is exactly as some previous poster said. I played MSU against my friends WoC and when there was no combat at all by turn 5 and he had brought a magic light army he had basically spent 2 hours chasing me around the board. Even though I won handily I found it to be an extremely boring match from his viewpoint. It forced him to change his list, which is part of what i wanted as Mark of Khorne on everything is fine for chopping things up but is easily abused by a quick opponent. Final thoughts are if it is a tourney or league do what you want but friends don`t make friends waste hours so they can shoot them to pieces.

[brechttomme]

I played MSU against my friends WoC and when there was no combat at all by turn 5 and he had brought a magic light army he had basically spent 2 hours chasing me around the board. [...] Mark of Khorne on everything is fine for chopping things up but is easily abused by a quick opponent. Final thoughts are if it is a tourney or league do what you want but friends don`t make friends waste hours so they can shoot them to pieces.

In this example, to me it just seems like a tough match up for him. Full-Khorne WoC is going to easily be abused by any Wood Elf player, wether using MSU shooting lists or otherwise. If he was fighting my Tomb Kings for example, that would have been a much better match up for him as I can't really redirect him too much and can't escape with my puny M4 and no marching. Meanwhile, he'd beat almost everything I have in combat and take minimal damage at range with his armour. Of course magic would take its toll on him, but then again, not taking any magic in 8th edition is pretty risky.

Now, If he had taken something different than a mono-Khorne list, he could have won in the movement phase. Just because we have 1" more in Movement doesn't mean he can't plan ahead to beat us at our own game... (except maybe skirmishing Waywatchers and similar, but its not like that'll make the difference, and he can just magic them off). To me, it seems that people only enjoy Warhammer when they can push their blocks of combat units into eachother and roll dice. Is it just that that is the differing opinion? That I, for example, like it more to think ahead of the game and meticulously position all my units each turn to try and get out of charge arcs, etc. while most players prefer to just duke it out with dice? Not saying that with a combat-oriented army you can't be tactical of course, and good generals will (without bad luck) still beat less experienced generals, but it does seem much more straight-forward and less thought requiring to me (Note: I also play Tomb Kings, Vampire Counts and Kislev so I have had my taste of combat-oriented block-lists). Maybe it's just a preference of playstyle?

Also, do you really feel you would lose friends by using an MSU list? I'm sure players will learn how to counter these lists, as everything has a counter. It might just be the element of surprise and the completely opposite playstyle of most armies that throws the opponent off for the first couple of games...

[Wooster Shooster]

This depends so so so much on the opponent, their army lists, and why they enjoy the game. Some examples. There's a player at my local store who plays a warriors of chaos list comprised of 2 hordes of warriors, some character,s and nothing else. He clearly only plays the game to smash things to bits and gets upset when he is too slow to achieve this goal. My favorite opponent, however, is my friend's dark elves. When we play WE vs. DE the game is decided, always, in the movement phase, carefully planning each move until the clash. These strategic movement games are a lot more fun for many players, and the bows only add to it, as it gives them something to seriously worry about as they manoeuvre. Where an orc player might get mad if he doesn't reach combat until turn 5, his complaining should be met by questions; why no cavalry? warmachines? goblins? magic? All of these are important aspects of a good game of warhammer. (particularly goblins)
I ought to mention also that my dark elf playing friend would MUCH rather be shot by bows than smashed to death by treekin.
And the last point; who actually takes satisfaction in crushing 10 T3 armourless elf archers? I think these players might be in it for the wrong reasons. In my games we often remove the unit without rolling, as there isn't any satisfaction in crushing a unit that doesn't stand a chance. A unit tricked out for combat will get the most out of challenging a worthy rival, and when opposed by toothpick elf archers, the player should relish the opportunity to test their tactical prowess, not just the pure might of their unit entries.

[dusk1983]

I agree with everyone above that MSU adds an entire level of strategy and tactics to the game which (as well as being the only way we're truly competitive) can make the game a lot more interesting and challenging for all players.

Unfortunately there are players who don't want to be challenged. They only play for power trips or what have you. In the 40k scene we call these people Grey Knight Players

All that said there is a big difference between a MSU list and a shooting bunker list. I can understand the frustration with playing against an army that doesnt move or in any way play the game, just bunkers around warmachines or mages or what have you and keeps firing until they are either dead or the enemy is dead. To me, that takes tactics out of the game and makes it more about the dice rolls.

With all shooting wood elf armies though, there are still tactics involved and movement and strategy, because we only get S4 longbows at close range, and if we get charged we're dead. But it is nice to be able to engage in close combat as well, seeing as the game is never going to be just about one phase and nor should it be.

[Monkey]

I think part of the problem is, if played correctly the MSU list is supposed to be very frustrating to play against. You avoid combats, don't take risks, move out of the way of you're opponents stuff etc. The whole idea behind the list is that you frustrate your opponent and prevent him from getting to grips with any meaningful part of your army. So while it's great fun to play with. it's understandable that some people might not like to play against this type of list. Especially if they are the sort of person who finds it hard to adjust to something different.

[Glory_of_the_Forest]

I play against Dwarf and Lizardmen armies in fantasy and Sperce Mehreens in 40k (I play Dark Eldar)
Generally I run rings around my opponents, shooting them to hell and back while moving a "trolling unit" behind their lines to use when the end is almost upon me. My enemies (friends really, but meh) generally hate me for this tactic, but it works, every other game I try to play without said tactics ends in a large defeat for me, and much gloating for weeks on end on their part. MSU seems to work best on players with the point and click mentality, especially if they have large egos; it means that they spend too much of the game getting frustrated to actually do some real damage, making silly moves and all in all ruining themselves.
What I'm trying to get at with this rambling wall of writing is that this "MSU avoidance" tactic works, and is one of the only things that works consistently for Wood Elves, especially versing some of the more heavy armies, or the armies specialised in close combat.
Hope this made sense
Ash

[brechttomme]

I agree with everyone above that MSU adds an entire level of strategy and tactics to the game which (as well as being the only way we're truly competitive) can make the game a lot more interesting and challenging for all players.

Unfortunately there are players who don't want to be challenged. They only play for power trips or what have you.

So, I think this might actually be a good conclusion. Most of the time, I have found players who have been playing Warhammer for a longer time seem to enjoy all the aspects of the game, but newer players often do too, it's just that some people only seem to think around combat. Maybe those players should try to enjoy all aspects of the game more, and once they "learn" to do that, they'll start to appreciate the challenge of outwitting your opponent and winning in other phases of the game (such as movement instead of purely combat)

it's understandable that some people might not like to play against this type of list. Especially if they are the sort of person who finds it hard to adjust to something different.

I think this may also be the root of the problem. The Wood Elf playstyle with MSU is so radically different that the opponent is clearly not used to it, and any change in their battle plan makes them have to think harder, and be challenged. The element of surprise really helps us, but after several games, the opponent should have found some ways in which he can counter us, and once he gets used to fighting MSU lists, he'll be less opposed to playing against them. I guess it's just a matter of getting used to it.

But it is nice to be able to engage in close combat as well, seeing as the game is never going to be just about one phase and nor should it be.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. But, that doesn't necessarily mean you have to get into combat willingly though. While your opponent's tactic is often to get into combat ASAP, our tactic is to avoid combat at all costs (except when you have a clear "unfair" advantage). That just seems like two different tactics to me, and are both equally viable and challenging to play with or against. I think this again refers to players wanting to play a challenging game or not. Like I've already said, it doesn't seem very fun for the Wood Elf player either if the enemy wants you to play an easy win for him, by just letting your defenseless archers die.

But thanks to all of you! I think I've learned a bit more about human psychology .

[Ethelite]

But just srsly now... with all how 8th edition and other army rulebooks are now... does a WE army really stand a chance with something else than MSU? The answer is NO... srsly unless u play vs some reaaaaaaaaaaaally friendly lists, u might win with something else than MSU... but all good tournament lists will smash wood elves to dust.

[FriedTaterExplosion]

But just srsly now... with all how 8th edition and other army rulebooks are now... does a WE army really stand a chance with something else than MSU? The answer is NO... srsly unless u play vs some reaaaaaaaaaaaally friendly lists, u might win with something else than MSU... but all good tournament lists will smash wood elves to dust.

Not true. Wood Elves can work without MSU. I'm running this list at 2500 pts:

47 Eternal Guard (full command with razor standard)
8 Dryads
8 Dryads
Treeman
Treeman

Highborn
Spellweaver
BSB Noble
Eagle Noble
Eagle Noble

Outside the HoDA on one of my eagle nobles- the only bowshots in my list are the highborn, spellweaver, and nobles' bows.

It's the anti-thesis of MSU- all I have all of my eggs in one basket with the EG bus (which comes out at around 1300 pts with the characters in it.) This list has been doing splendidly in my local gaming group. I'm at about 13-3 with it.

[Ethelite]

Not true. Wood Elves can work without MSU. I'm running this list at 2500 pts:

47 Eternal Guard (full command with razor standard)
8 Dryads
8 Dryads
Treeman
Treeman

Highborn
Spellweaver
BSB Noble
Eagle Noble
Eagle Noble

Outside the HoDA on one of my eagle nobles- the only bowshots in my list are the highborn, spellweaver, and nobles' bows.

It's the anti-thesis of MSU- all I have all of my eggs in one basket with the EG bus (which comes out at around 1300 pts with the characters in it.) This list has been doing splendidly in my local gaming group. I'm at about 13-3 with it.

a) most comps don't allow 47 model units
b) your actually gonna get denied by a good MSU player
c) i assume most of your game is about holding the big block alive... but EG are still s3 dudes... vs some armies ure all bout static CR. Still id kill off everything else which walks alone and then when time allows me to would try to finish off the block.
d) how do the lists of people around your local look like?

[FriedTaterExplosion]

a.) Never seen comps that limit you to 47 models. I've seen some that limit you to 500 pts for a unit (in which case I scale down the unit a bit.)
b.) I've run MSU shooty-avoidance lists. They CAN win, but as mentioned in this thread, they're tough. I'd wager a MSU list would have TONS of difficulty extracting points out of the treemen, and EG. While everyone focuses on my EG/character bus with treeman- the dryads and eagle nobles provide sufficient counters to a MSU list.
c.) The characters have great synergy with the block, and they are not pushovers. The highborn has annoyance of netlings, the dawnspear, charmed shield and stone of rebirth. The BSB has armor of silvered steel and the hero bane magic weapon. The spellweaver is in the second rank and has the Rhymers harp.
d.) The running joke in my local gaming group (which includes a number of very competitive players) is how the internet meta mentality can't accept that my list will work. I've posted this list on this forum and others and it's continually derided. The proof is in the pudding. It rocks. Most people will never bother trying something this outside of the internet hive-mind.

Is it invincible? No. It has lost. Does it win consistently for me? Yes. It's a very satisfying list to play. Is it going to win me a GT? Probably not, but given it's track record in my local group, I'm feeling really good about taking this to a GT.

I'm sorry, but I'm just super frustrated at the meta mentality on these forums somethimes. Wood elves can win with something other than MSU. I'm not dissing MSU, I guess I really just want to stir up some discussion and raise a defiant fist to the sky against the meta.

[MyNameDidntFit]

47 Eternal Guard (full command with razor standard)
8 Dryads
8 Dryads
Treeman
Treeman

Highborn
Spellweaver
BSB Noble
Eagle Noble
Eagle Noble

With all due respect to your opinion and your track record in your group... the problem here is that any 'anti-deathstar' tactic will work here... only tenfold better than against most of the more renowned deathstars.

As a WoC player all I can think is "I wonder how many EG would die turn one to a pair breath weapons and a pair of S5 templates" followed by "or maybe hold it up with my unkillable Hortennse BSB/Lord for the entire game". Yeah, this is a specific example, but these are things that are in most WoC lists (god forbid a Daemon Prince of Nurgle gets into your unit...), and most races have other options too.

[FriedTaterExplosion]

This is the thing that I can't understand.

I'm not unbeatable with this list. All that I am saying it that it's a good list overall!

Yes, it will have horrible matchups. All I ever hear about when I post it is how A, B, or C will crush this list.

I run this list against gamers who bring their all-comers GT lists and I have fun, competitive games that usually end with a victory for me.

My point is that it is a valid altervative to the MSU shooty-avoidance lists- not that MSU lists suck- but that there are other builds with wood elves that can work.

I will post how this list does in the Unplugged GT that I will be taking it to.

[Ethelite]

But when u play in a tournament you must be prepared to face all kinds of armies and lists... so it needs to be universal. The other choice would be playing team tournaments and try to play the pairing phase to your advantage... still risky. The fact that there exist good counters to death stars already is a reason why i wouldn't risk the list.

a.) Never seen comps that limit you to 47 models. I've seen some that limit you to 500 pts for a unit (in which case I scale down the unit a bit.)

The ETC (European Team Championship... which still has teams from around the world not just EU) composition allows you for max 40 models in an unit also limits to 450 points.

[ryanabt]

I can see it'd be boring to play against as the enemy is likely not moving and not using tactical skill to beat you. In that case I can agree.

But the dynamic Wood Elf "bowline" seems the complete opposite of that to me. You say that people don't like it because they can't get into combat and roll dice and smash the Elves up, but isn't there more to Warhammer than just rolling dice? I would think it as a fun opponent because you need to primarily win in the movement phase, as you will win combat anyway. So, instead of rolling handfuls of dice (combat) it's all about tactically positioning your troops (movement). Is this the main problem? That people only really enjoy the game when they can get into combat and punch Elves in the face (doesn't seem very fun from a Wood Elf perspective)?

Just curious of course, not trying to be offensive

If you think you are disagreeing with me, you are not. I wholeheartedly agree.

I tend to agree with most on here that the problem is with the opponents willingness to get better at the game or not. If an opponent things that the way they play should NEVER progress or evolve, then they will dislike playing MSU shooting. However, this player is probably going to get upset about any number of things they don't like (over the top magic, heavy tarpit, etc).

I believe that MSU shooting helps the meta. When I first started playing it, many of my friends didn't know how to handle it. Now, they have gotten better at ignoring the pestering units and prioritizing. These things help them in all their battles, not just those against me.

It all comes down to the meta. If your meta is willing to allow change and difference then you will be fine, if not, then you will get a stale meta that probably is never going to get better in the tourney setting.

As far as MSU versus other lists, that is for a different discussion.

[brechttomme]

+1 to the above post! I agree with everything

[Mollesvinet]

Hey FriedTaterExplosion,

thumbs up for trying something different! I for one would love to read some battle reports from you, using the army you mentioned. Of course there will be some things which can counter the list, but the MSU have the same problem (remember the bloodthirster anyone?). Your list might have more weaknesses than the msu, i can't say for sure since i am not an expert, but that doesn't mean it will never win and therefore is horrible. If you like to play this list, then don't get upset if people point out some weaknesses and just enjoy your games.

Some people are ultra competitive, playing basically the same list with only minor changes every single game. For me i think its funnier to try out some different lists, keep them competetive but add in some fun/different aspects from time to time. It makes for funnier games in the long run in my opinion. Of course for tournaments, that will be a different case if you really want to win i suppose. The same goes for shooting mentality, maybe i would be frustrated to play a dwarf castle list for several consecutive games but if a player mixes his lists and sometimes have the castle list i think its fine for a change. Maybe the same goes for WE msu for other opponents?

[MyNameDidntFit]

This is the thing that I can't understand.

The over-reaction is what I don't understand. You posted an all-comers' list and I posted a few (of the myriad) things that an all-comers list of my primary army would do to laugh it right off the table... never said your list wasn't valid or that you can't play it; just that EG make a sub-par deathstar and any decent tourney army can deal with far, far worse deathstars... and so will have absolutely no trouble with this one.

If you like playing with it, more power to you, but I doubt my poker face could restrain the smile I'd get if someone placed a 1300 point unit of Elves opposite me.

[irishfarmer]

Tater, I get what you are saying. Given my limited experience, anyone probably can dream up a list that can beat any given list on paper. All you are saying is that you are competitive when people bring lists to local groups that have to be good against everybody. Of course I have gaming experience with other games, and this is certainly true across them all.

I am quite interested in what your list is doing, and will look forward to seeing how it performs at the GT if you are willing to post it. I guess I am too new to this game to be a skeptic about your list.

[HorridStonefish]

@MyNameDidntFit: In my experience if you are starting a post with 'With all due respect...' then dont post it. I personally dont think FriedTaterExplosion overreacted, you attacked his list and he defended it. Potato posted an all comers list, translation: 'a list HE is comfortable playing against any other list' and quite frankly saying my WoC list will beat your Woodelf list is pretty lame on many levels. You didnt offer anything to either his list or the topic in general.

On topic: Ive played an array of MSU lists over the last little while and have found that I personally enjoy playing with a combat oriented rather than shooting oriented list. This is a personal preference, i get more joy from out manuvering then running in and stomping my opponent, breaking his big 'tough' units on the charge with multiple tiny 'weak' units. Whilst i can see the joy in keeping an opponent at arms length and shooting him off the board, i can also see how that is not much fun for the opponent, moving your dudes around and watching them dwindle away off the board with out achiving anything is kinda depressing. In saying this, if it was me getting all shot up everytime i played, id change my game and adapt rather than cursing my opponent, the gods and weeping into my beard at night.

[Andrew]

The vast misconception is that WHFB is only about close combat with supporting elements (magic, shooting) but the reality is that the strongest players use all the phases and the strengths and weaknesses therein.

This misconception is far more common among the older players, who have gone through many editions where shooting just wasn't that viable because of arbitrary line of sight blockages, as well as overall being weak. In turn, they teach the younger players this same foolish mentality, despite the fact that the game has REALLY opened up opportunities to make use of missile weapons. Interestingly, the most common comments when I play archer-heavy armies (WE and TK) are "Go play 40k", as if my desire to shoot a lot stems from wanting to rain arrows down.

No. It's the way the armies were designed. I have beatstick armies too (WoC, DoC, Bretonnians) but I find the style of play that is "walk forward and smash or die" to be boring. Limiting oneself limits the fun, I think.

In the end, what can one expect when armies from the tribal era (Beastmen) and Renaissance (Empire) and every time in between are all mixed together in the same game. My suggestion to people who complain is: "Deal with it." WoC, DoC, Ogres, Lizards, and Vampires (the top 5) all have insane stats and little shooting (except for those damned blowpipes!). Elves, humans, and Tomb Kings don't, so they make up for it by being able to kill from far away.

Battle of Hastings, b****es! :P