3 smartest tacticians in the lore of Warhammer?

[Roger the Shrubber]

.

[zefyris]

Han, good idea for a thread, I like it. I think most LL are mostly known for their martial or magic prowess so despite being a strategy game, we don't often hear about who did well strategically.
Are we limiting that to normal military tactics or including underhanded tricks like the skaven for example like to use?

[Roger the Shrubber]

Originally posted by zefyris:

Han, good idea for a thread, I like it. I think most LL are mostly known for their martial or magic prowess so despite being a strategy game, we don't often hear about who did well strategically.
Are we limiting that to normal military tactics or including underhanded tricks like the skaven for example like to use?

Any and all you find interesting.

[zefyris]

hmm, what's interesting is that manyu good generals in the lore may not be LL. Many are dead, too.
If we take HE as an example, I believe the candidate for best HE generals are as follow

-Alith Anar :hundred of years of guerrilla battles against a superior enemy, very efficient at it
-Mentheus of Caledor : Chosen by Morvael as his head general, he led a one century long war against Malekith's forces to retake Ulthuan, and succeeded on it. He's responsible for the conscription system giving the HE spearmen and archers, among other things.
-Caledor I The Conqueror(real name Imrik, grand son of Caledor Dragon tamer) specifically said to be a good general in the lore, he fought the first war against Malekith right after Malekith's treason. Spent most of his long life at war.
-Tethlis the Slayer. Best general under the rule of Caradryel, chosen as the next Phoenix King, he spent again most of his life (and all 300 years as a King) leading armies. And he was so good at it that he pushed the Dark elves to the brink of extinction.


For greenskins, I think Skarsnik stands out as a far more cunning and smart general than any other, but I may be forgetting someone here. Grom maybe? Just can't see him as good as Skarsnik on that.

For Lizardmen, I would say Tehenhahuin seems like a good guess, pushing back the skavens out of Lustria like he did. But I don't know enough the lizardmen's lore to list them.

For skavens, it's damn difficult to say, they're all cunning to begin with...

[Trooper #900129-H]

From actual fluff, Karl Franz would be a prima candidate: Being the "possibly Greatest statesman and general of the Old World" currently and all.
Seeing how the Empire is still around while being virtually overrun constantly by all kinds of horrors a regular human should have no business standing their ground against, makes Franz a prime contender.

Vampires / Mannfred would fit too: Known to be devilishly cunning and are able to hang on to Sylvania in the face of Empire zeolotry.

Skaven would also work, if not for their tendacy to f*ck up their own plans, regardless how brilliant.

Settra should be in the list for sure: One does not become the despot of forever warring ancient Kingdoms by not knowing how to field armies.

Tyrion is known to be a very capable general too, but in the lore he seems to be more of a "hands-on" kind of guy.

[Ysthrall]

Azhag is probably one of the best Greenskin generals tactically, but he has Nagash whispering in his ear, so that's not clear. Yeah, Skarsnik is likely more skilled.

On the basis of strategic and tactical acumen, I'd probably give it to various elves. Maybe Settra and Karl Franz could make the top ten, but against centuries of battlefield experience... hmm, that's a thought, any of the Chaos lords make the cut?

[Lampros]

Morathi, because she can seduce you all to do her bidding - if she so wishes! ;)

[DecayWolf]

All the above sounds like "they're great, because the writter said so"
Which is also similar to a lot of things that are quite childish in the lore or some characters with incomplete and serious broken personalities.

What's their battlefield achievements, where they completely out played the enemy and won an otherwise impossible victory? How much influence they had with their faction and how they used it, how they administrate attrition, resources production priority, distribution routes, wages upkeep reduction, training efficiency, tactical guerrila, grand scale battlefield, siege or naval experience. What were their political view, how did they weakened their enemies in both battlefield with superior tactics and before the battle itself, how did they react after a major lose or how did they take advantage of a winning, how did they saw a long term victory and how quickly they achieved it?

Between many other hundrends of qualities which a good general HAS to have.
Just saying, "he was good, because lore said so" doesn't make him good, only makes everything looks retarded.

[Toby Larone]

Originally posted by DecayWolf:

All the above sounds like "they're great, because the writter said so"
Which is also similar to a lot of things that are quite childish in the lore or some characters with incomplete and serious broken personalities.

What's their battlefield achievements, where they completely out played the enemy and won an otherwise impossible victory? How much influence they had with their faction and how they used it, how they administrate attrition, resources production priority, distribution routes, wages upkeep reduction, training efficiency, tactical guerrila, grand scale battlefield, siege or naval experience. What were their political view, how did they weakened their enemies in both battlefield with superior tactics and before the battle itself, how did they react after a major lose or how did they take advantage of a winning, how did they saw a long term victory and how quickly they achieved it?

Between many other hundrends of qualities which a good general HAS to have.
Just saying, "he was good, because lore said so" doesn't make him good, only makes everything looks retarded.

Then you're in the wrong place to look my friend cuase of many exploits we only have a small section in the codexes to go of.

And warhammer plays much into the trope of big massive battle with a duel thrown into it to decide the victory. Many battles were won in the lore by simply killing the enemy general and applying our senses of a good general doesn't work with every faction.

The only one that your definition could work with is archaon during the end times. But their is a reason no one talk about those.

Problem is that many factions see losses of troops as irelevant best example would be the undead or the skaven, you win against these faction by killing the bosses and routing the enemy of the field. rather then slaying al of them.

Weakening the enemy is also only a thing the bad guys can rely do, since the good guys are permanantly on the brink of defeat threw sheer number of threats. You can't use hit and run tactics against a rampaging horde of beastmen when you have an ork warband to deal with elsewhere. Most of the bad guys either don't have a logistic base or have one so large that you wont make a dent in it.


Also what have political views to do with making a good general?

[Hyen《A》 ♧]

Gorbad Ironclaw. Devastated the empire all the way to Altdorf and killed the emperor.
Skarsnik also stands here for being the first goblin to snatch 8 Peaks from the skaven. The part where the goblins snuck into the skaven lair under the guise of dead skaven skins was brilliant.

[Whysoserious]

Originally posted by DecayWolf:

All the above sounds like "they're great, because the writter said so"
Which is also similar to a lot of things that are quite childish in the lore or some characters with incomplete and serious broken personalities.

What's their battlefield achievements, where they completely out played the enemy and won an otherwise impossible victory? How much influence they had with their faction and how they used it, how they administrate attrition, resources production priority, distribution routes, wages upkeep reduction, training efficiency, tactical guerrila, grand scale battlefield, siege or naval experience. What were their political view, how did they weakened their enemies in both battlefield with superior tactics and before the battle itself, how did they react after a major lose or how did they take advantage of a winning, how did they saw a long term victory and how quickly they achieved it?

Between many other hundrends of qualities which a good general HAS to have.
Just saying, "he was good, because lore said so" doesn't make him good, only makes everything looks retarded.

It's litterally ALL 'because the writer said so'. Haha, wtf is this comment?

[Hyen《A》 ♧]

Originally posted by Whysoserious:

It's litterally ALL 'because the writer said so'. Haha, wtf is this comment?

I'm sure he meant when "Due to sheer tactics and a bit of luck, the hero was able to predict his enemy's movements". Which isn't proof of strategic mastery. A good example is like Skarsnik using skaven bodies to sneak into a skaven lair and kill everyone without alarming the other outposts. Now that is strategy.

[Roger the Shrubber]

Originally posted by ☆HyenA☆:

Originally posted by Whysoserious:

It's litterally ALL 'because the writer said so'. Haha, wtf is this comment?

I'm sure he meant when "Due to sheer tactics and a bit of luck, the hero was able to predict his enemy's movements". Which isn't proof of strategic mastery. A good example is like Skarsnik using skaven bodies to sneak into a skaven lair and kill everyone without alarming the other outposts. Now that is strategy.

How did they use the bodies?

[DecayWolf]

Originally posted by the Spanish Inquisition:

Originally posted by DecayWolf:

All the above sounds like "they're great, because the writter said so"
Which is also similar to a lot of things that are quite childish in the lore or some characters with incomplete and serious broken personalities.

What's their battlefield achievements, where they completely out played the enemy and won an otherwise impossible victory? How much influence they had with their faction and how they used it, how they administrate attrition, resources production priority, distribution routes, wages upkeep reduction, training efficiency, tactical guerrila, grand scale battlefield, siege or naval experience. What were their political view, how did they weakened their enemies in both battlefield with superior tactics and before the battle itself, how did they react after a major lose or how did they take advantage of a winning, how did they saw a long term victory and how quickly they achieved it?

Between many other hundrends of qualities which a good general HAS to have.
Just saying, "he was good, because lore said so" doesn't make him good, only makes everything looks retarded.

Then you're in the wrong place to look my friend cuase of many exploits we only have a small section in the codexes to go of.

And warhammer plays much into the trope of big massive battle with a duel thrown into it to decide the victory. Many battles were won in the lore by simply killing the enemy general and applying our senses of a good general doesn't work with every faction.

The only one that your definition could work with is archaon during the end times. But their is a reason no one talk about those.

Problem is that many factions see losses of troops as irelevant best example would be the undead or the skaven, you win against these faction by killing the bosses and routing the enemy of the field. rather then slaying al of them.

Weakening the enemy is also only a thing the bad guys can rely do, since the good guys are permanantly on the brink of defeat threw sheer number of threats. You can't use hit and run tactics against a rampaging horde of beastmen when you have an ork warband to deal with elsewhere. Most of the bad guys either don't have a logistic base or have one so large that you wont make a dent in it.


Also what have political views to do with making a good general?

Actually you can deal with multiple fronts if you've the autority, resources and intelligence to do so. Empires did it in real life.
For instance old China with the mongols, generally they bribed the leaders to fight each other, so none would ever be abled to climb in power. Rome, 'adopted' some barbarian tribes to fight each other, they are also known for it's political intrigues, which also extends to war outside the battlefield. WW2 Japan declared war on U.S.A because they blocked their supply lines, etc.

Beastman for instance, they could've made a agreement with other factions, hired mercenaries and specialists combatants and trackers, to do the following.
1 - Clean the mutating corruption with sacred rituals. All that can be done, can also be undone.
2 - Track their nests, if it's a florest set it ablaze while making ambushes into the 'safe' unflorested area, they could even block some exit paths so they'll all burn all together.
If they're in a cave, bring a awful loads of explosives (from the dwarfs, but empire can also produce their own powder) combinated with some nasty magic and simply make the cave's entrace succumb, cutting their food supply, entrace of air and the exit.
3 - Poison their water and food, kill anything that they could use to feed themselves or arm themselves.
4 - Others.

"Being on edge from being constatly attacked" is not a excuse.

Vampires, clean their corruption, witch hunt their leaders, siege their towns, destroy their towns, parley with some of them promising civil rights and riches in exchange of their loyalt as a empire agent, talking of which, spy their ever move, line work of intelligence is the first step of warfire, knowing what your enemy is going to do, while I like vamps, they don't look military organizated folks to me.
Fortified defenses, cutting the advances, weakening their magic, between other things when combined could turn the war.

"Weakening" the enemies could be as simply as destroying the food crops from where they are to where they're going to, so they'll starve and die, no engagement needed, that's the first basic rule of attrition, a army has to feed.
No guerrila tactics could be useful against any sort of enemy.

As for skavens, well... There's few2 things that could be done.
Pick the deadliest poison in the world, mix with an pretty much endless amount of water and keep flooding all the roles they're coming from. Eventually they'll all end dead. If the posion also has corrosive proprieties, mutagenic, carcinogenic, sterile between other useful proprieties, even better, so their offsprings would all be contamined and faded to die.

Another solution, but perhaps outside the lore, would be mutate their genes, so they cant reproduce anymore, done, fixed. You could take Mass Effect series with the Krogan dillema as an good example of it, certainly we do it in real world against insects plagues for instance.

Y know, only because they come from the ground, doesn't mean their whole specie couldn't suffer genocide.

I could go further own, but my point is quite simple, in strategy warfare there's always strategy.
That's one of my grips with the lore of this game, it's simply weak writting, and it's not only end times.
Also it's not only skaven nor undead which has endless army, even Wood Elvens also have access to an infinite army, because the writter said so, it's pathetic.
I love the concept of this IP, the concept, but the writting, meh.

[DecayWolf]

Originally posted by ☆HyenA☆:

Originally posted by Whysoserious:

It's litterally ALL 'because the writer said so'. Haha, wtf is this comment?

I'm sure he meant when "Due to sheer tactics and a bit of luck, the hero was able to predict his enemy's movements". Which isn't proof of strategic mastery. A good example is like Skarsnik using skaven bodies to sneak into a skaven lair and kill everyone without alarming the other outposts. Now that is strategy.

Pretty much this.

[Toby Larone]

Originally posted by DecayWolf:

Actually you can deal with multiple fronts if you've the autority, resources and intelligence to do so. Empires did it in real life.
For instance old China with the mongols, generally they bribed the leaders to fight each other, so none would ever be abled to climb in power. Rome, 'adopted' some barbarian tribes to fight each other, they are also known for it's political intrigues, which also extends to war outside the battlefield. WW2 Japan declared war on U.S.A because they blocked their supply lines, etc.

Beastman for instance, they could've made a agreement with other factions, hired mercenaries and specialists combatants and trackers, to do the following.
1 - Clean the mutating corruption with sacred rituals. All that can be done, can also be undone.
2 - Track their nests, if it's a florest set it ablaze while making ambushes into the 'safe' unflorested area, they could even block some exit paths so they'll all burn all together.
If they're in a cave, bring a awful loads of explosives (from the dwarfs, but empire can also produce their own powder) combinated with some nasty magic and simply make the cave's entrace succumb, cutting their food supply, entrace of air and the exit.
3 - Poison their water and food, kill anything that they could use to feed themselves or arm themselves.
4 - Others.

"Being on edge from being constatly attacked" is not a excuse.

Vampires, clean their corruption, witch hunt their leaders, siege their towns, destroy their towns, parley with some of them promising civil rights and riches in exchange of their loyalt as a empire agent, talking of which, spy their ever move, line work of intelligence is the first step of warfire, knowing what your enemy is going to do, while I like vamps, they don't look military organizated folks to me.
Fortified defenses, cutting the advances, weakening their magic, between other things when combined could turn the war.

"Weakening" the enemies could be as simply as destroying the food crops from where they are to where they're going to, so they'll starve and die, no engagement needed, that's the first basic rule of attrition, a army has to feed.
No guerrila tactics could be useful against any sort of enemy.

As for skavens, well... There's few2 things that could be done.
Pick the deadliest poison in the world, mix with an pretty much endless amount of water and keep flooding all the roles they're coming from. Eventually they'll all end dead. If the posion also has corrosive proprieties, mutagenic, carcinogenic, sterile between other useful proprieties, even better, so their offsprings would all be contamined and faded to die.

Another solution, but perhaps outside the lore, would be mutate their genes, so they cant reproduce anymore, done, fixed. You could take Mass Effect series with the Krogan dillema as an good example of it, certainly we do it in real world against insects plagues for instance.

Y know, only because they come from the ground, doesn't mean their whole specie couldn't suffer genocide.

I could go further own, but my point is quite simple, in strategy warfare there's always strategy.
That's one of my grips with the lore of this game, it's simply weak writting, and it's not only end times.
Also it's not only skaven nor undead which has endless army, even Wood Elvens also have access to an infinite army, because the writter said so, it's pathetic.
I love the concept of this IP, the concept, but the writting, meh.

Beastmen don't use gold, they are the hounds of chaos, only following the wills of their gods or trying to tear down civilization.
You are clearly not in the picture of just how things work in warhammer, beastmen don't have nests, but are mutaded humans. They do not have any form of infrastructure and if you burn down your own stuff to beat them, at some point you'll be running out of things to burn.
Also not everything cna be undone, especialy when chaos is involved.

Vampires are mostly nobles and deffinitly have military training and they have time to gain experience beyond mortals.And they will not serve anyone, but themselves.

Witch hunters spend alot of time keeping such threats in check and the empire is a testamony of just how good they are at the job, without them the empire wouldn't be their.

The empire isn't invading enemy territory it is defending it's own land and needs to keep it going for as long as possible or else the situation only gets worse.

Your skaven solutions are stupid, have you played the game as skaven?
They have a unit called plague monks, these guys are living with diseases only slightly less bad then followers of nurgle. And also while they have sewer bases they have alot of bases elsewere.Including their own massive cities outside of the empires reach.

And genemutation, might I remind you this is a fantasy setting, where the only ones that can do such things are chaos and the very skaven you want to eradicate.