i really hate infrantry
reason? here's why:
in my opinion, infrantry rely soley on cr to win the day, and nothing on skill. there are many exceptions, but in general, it all comes down to that. that's like a horde, hoping that the enemy doesn't do enough damage to ruin their resolve, breaking the enemy and chasing them down. i like hitting hard, and infrantry doesn't do that, most of them anyway. and besides this, they're all really slow, too!
wood elves, on the other hand, have only 1 (or 2) infrantry units, the eternals, which are one of the exveptions (though some of it relies on cr still), since they mostly rely on skill.

does anyone else hate infrantry?

note: im sorry if i posted this in the wrong section, feel free to move it, i didn't know where to post it, maybe general off topic?

Its the way the game works. CR is just a fair rule that can quickly and simply sort out who won what.

But i do agree with you. I too hate the infantry (rank and file ones). I think there is skill and tactics but mainly its getting as much CR as possible. And i hate it when someone has equipped a unit to have like 9 CR before a blow is struck. It just seems in real life impossible. Thats why i do not use EG. I hate counting ranks in the combat phase but agree with how they give CR bonuses.

The thing i hate the most is items that give CR. I mean how? :huh: I have a ring you run away!!!!! :huh: :p

But it is the way the game is played and the game is obviously successful and so this must be balanced.

I understand and agree with CR. But i also agree with what you say Juriko.

SDETT

that's why we play woodies, not empire or skaven :p

You hate infantry? Then play 40k because this game is ALL about infantry. There's still skill and tactics involved with infantry, you just don't know them yet.

yeh, i plan to play 40k in a year or so (definetly doing eldar, models look SO COOL!!)

Eldar are a tricky army to play with, and it seems if you can't grasp infantry, you may have a bit of trouble with them.

Haha I really liked that one. And yes im not a big fan of infantery. my main opponent is skaven so im pretty tired of the clanrats.. bbah

Infantry is too useful in any army to not have, unless you are using all knights with 2+ or better armour saves. I can see why you wouldnt like them, but if you dont like them to a point of not using them, well, that would be weird.

i see how they are necessary for some armies and for the fluff of warhammer as the basic troops in midevil times were foot troops who worked in groups


i use them (saurus) but i don't like them too much, i like faster harder htting things better

note: maybe ill just collect the eldar models, and do a diff. army

in my opinion eldar are the second hardest army to play with in 40k (dark eldar being first), and wood elves USED to be the hardest army to play with in fantasy until we had the option of taking the all-dryad horde
maybe you don't like using infantry becuase they rely on combat resolution, but tell me if i'm wrong, this game IS combat resolution,
your calvary cause wounds to gain combat resolution and win the combat
your units will only run becuase they lost combat resolution
the game is based on it,
so if you hate all infantry that is based on getting combat resolution, how do you propose we represent infantry that aren't as good as elves?
if 20 men are fighting 5 elves, how do the men even have a chance if they don't get a bonus for being in an organized formation and having more men?
i think winning with wood elves requires the same amount of tactics winning with empire does, it's just empire tactics are a lot different
i really just don't understand why you could hate them, because if you took them away you would take away half of the game,
and every game would just be specialized super troops vs. specialized super troops and that sounds like a really stupid game

i don't hate them, just don't like them, but in some cases they are pretty good. i agree with u that the whole game is cr, as we have victroy pts, and i like those.

my point is that i like hitting hard, and infrantry doesn't really do that, with some exceptions. the run in, inflict a small amount of damage, then win the fight cos of their boldness in numbers (and other factors, but that is kinda how it is, with ranks and outnumbering bonuses). that doesn't seem right to me, i like using skill instead of numbers, which again is one reason i like woodies (amounng thousands of others)

infrantry is more tactical, and while i like a challenge, they definetly not my favorite unit on the board.

you don't hate them? did i read the title of this topic wrong?

i guess that makes more sense, i wish you would have said that originally
if you play with that approach then you will really like eldar, aspect warriors are hard hitting and elites so i think you'll enjoy playing with them

sry about the unclearness and the title. :uhhhh:

you think i will like eldar?
cool! changee of plans im definetly playing eldar. i don't care if i win as long as i have fun!

I'm completely the opposite. I am a dwarf player of 10 years, obviously infantry is important for that army! I'd have to say that dwarf infantry as a whole is probably the exception to juriko's rule, sure they get the cr, but they also dish out the hurt with the great weapons and high weapon skill. They can take a beating too with their heavy armor. I do see where you are coming from though, which is why I have my wood elves. They are a nice change from massed ranks of troops. I like the extremely different tactics it takes to play a wood elf army, but I think I prefer the challenge of the pure infantry army that is found in the dwarfs. Every inch of movement is important and a single mistake can leave a flank exposed or a unit cut off from its support.

To sum up, I like infantry, I like their rules and I like what a big unit of ranked up troops looks like on the table. And I know that if I ever feel like a change I can always field my infantry-free wood elves and beat up on some skaven, empire or Orcs and Goblins whenever I want!

you don't have to apologize, you made a valid point and have a ceritian view,
i disagree with it,
nobody did anything wrong

ok, thank you winterguardian

yeh, dwarves can pack a punch, they are good too

I disgree (well, i agree with your point but i dont hate infantry), with my recently started goblin army i love infantry, in 2000 points 300 night goblin spearmen pwn. they always outnumber and with a few decent charges from my spider riders i can make a whole enemy army route in the first 3 turns.

beware of panic tests!
i see your point though

that's a lot of painting, after doing that i might have to side with juriko and hate infantry becuase that would take a lifetime of painting green and black, haha
their cool models though aren't they?

yeah, you'd go through like 3 cans of just 1 color!
i love the new gobbo models, though!

Infantry is the soul of Warhammer. 20 warriors can hold a large number of hits and still be usefull, while cavalry... kill three of them and they are useless. With a simple unit of 20 elf archers or 15 thunderers that is not hard to do...

i am a dwarf player, so I know how valuable is infantry in this game. It is very easy to plan and maneouver with fast cavalry and 16" moving miniatures, but making your plan work with 4" or even 3" Ms... it is quite different. that is why I like infantry; when it works I feel as if I were a great general!

Having played dwarfs for so long made me change into WE... It amazes me how 4 men in tights and 3 little tree branches can do the same work than 20 Iron brakers... I love them ;).

CYA

yes, dwarves have very good infrantry
and i agree about cavalry
but dwarves have a completely different style, since they only have infrantry

Infantry should generally be the bulk of an army, if one is searching for a more generic army to collect. They cost less to hire and maintain than cavalry and big machines of war, and are also less vulnerable in the respect of being smaller targets less encumbered targets. This leads to the relatively increased versatility of infantry both on and off the battlefield.