MSU Elves in 3rd edition - First Impressions


To help me with the transition from 2nd edition to 3rd edition, I wrote a relatively short blog post on the army list I have been using lately and how I intend to adapt it to new version of the Kings of War.

I hope you will find it an interesting read. Here is the link:

MSU Elves in 3rd edition - First Impressions



Really interesting read. I’d be interested as you go forward how much you feel losing nimble of the Drakons hurts them, especially as regiments.

Thank you for your comment!

I had my first 3rd edition game today, against another Elven army, although quite different in composition. I think I will try to summarise the first lessons in the battle report. Quite a few, interesting I think, take away’s already. As expected, the army cannot be used the same way as in 2nd edition and needs further changed to adapt.

But Drakon Riders stay :slight_smile: I just need to learn how to use them better, even though they have lost Nimble. They are still very important for that list.




I debated if I should write the battle report from the first game of 3rd edition and then share about my new lessons or should I finish 5 battle reports from the 2nd edition before I move to new one.

I decided to finish the reports from 2nd edition, simply because I think it is only fair I do it in the chronological order. Especially that 4 of them are from Australian Universal Battle tournament.

However, I also want to keep the discussion going as I would like to adapt to the new edition as quickly as possible. Because of that, I also decided I share my lessons and write a bit about the updated version of the army list I would like to test in the next game.

First, a few observations/lessons from my game, where I played against another Elven army:

  1. I did not have any impressions that the game plays differently. I think it is good because it helps to focus only on the few elements that are different, e.g. relative heights of the units and terrain, changes in units’ characteristics etc.

  2. I did not make any decision that would have been different in 2nd edition other than taking into account I am facing a different type of units that I did not face earlier. Such as Palace Guard horde or Shield Watch.

  3. I did, however, notice a difference in the way the units I used before could perform this time. For example, having shorter range on Chariots and Silver Breeze makes it more difficult and risky to get them into range for shooting. At the same time, keeping them out of charge range is very difficult too. In some cases, e.g. against Speed 9 or 10 enemies, one has to enter the charge range in order to shoot.

Another example was with Drakons (somewhat expected). Due to lack of nimble the usual manoeuvre of flying out of line of sight of the enemy and still be able to pivot second time to threaten the very same enemy is not an option now. My first conclusion is that I will need a much closer co-operation with other units, for example having something in front of drakons to prevent enemy from charging them but still having that option to attack the enemy if needed.

  1. I am not sure yet about the impact of the fact one does not have to disengage after melee. Certainly certain units may stay out of sight of potential flanking enemies. That can be useful to slow down some of the enemy units as they would need to deal with the interceptor alone.

In general, I would like to keep playing with the army that has the ability to do something in all phases of the game and retain the MSU-ish style of the army. It may be quite difficult but at the moment I think it should be possible.

However, I noticed that shooting in particular was not efficient enough for my army. I do not have much of it but in 2nd edition I was able to focus it on a single target and inflict enough damage for it to be meaningful in the upcoming melee. With the elements I had in my army it was not so anymore.

Hence a few changes.

  1. I upgraded Silver Breeze to the regiment - that allows me to have a good, flexible unit that can also occasionally help in melee with timely flank attack.

  2. I removed unit of Chariots and Chariot Noble - instead I added second regiment of Shamblers and added a Mage with Inspiring Talisman and Lightning Bolt. I think in this way 3 shooting units should be able to deal with a few small and lightly armoured targets on their own and maybe combine their efforts to do more damage on other targets. At the same time I am further boosting melee abilities as I think it will be needed.

Here is the picture of the army as it looks like on Universal Battle:

We shall see how it goes in my next game!



RIP chariots :disappointed_relieved:

Cheers for the feedback and update, SM. ‘Add more Silver Breeze’ was the first kneejerk reaction to how to transition 2E Elf armies into 3E Elf armies I heard about, and to some extent it appears to be true. Thinking about it, that unit did sort of replace chariots in what they do - mobile shooting, unit strength for scoring, opportunistic melee potential - even if 2E chariot hordes at the end of that edition did just about all of those things better.


Hi @Boss_Salvage !

I really don’t want the chariots gone from the list. I have not finished painting them yet, damn it! :slight_smile: However, it is true that they seem to be different now. Although they gained Steady Aim and better Nerve, 6 shots for regiment at 5+ to begin with is not going to help doing damage. In the 2nd edition I did not aim to rout entire units but I could focus enough fire to do meaningful damage. I admit I have had only one game so far but I did struggle to do much, especially that 18" range forces the Chariots to get into harms zone and may expose them to charges they don’t want take.

I do expect Silver Breeze to be more popular. I like flexibility the regiment provides and I was at the receiving end of their timely flank charge (spoilers alert!). I think I will still try to come up with some different ideas because I would like to add to the variety of army lists for Elves. I hope the changes implemented would not push people towards similar type of armies instead.

We shall see! :slight_smile:

1 Like

Chariots are more like cavalry but alkowa to do small, chip damage. They are not as effective as regular cavalry but arę way better i.e. vs phalanx.

Hi @MiSiO_1!

Indeed, they now have more attacks and seem to be more suited for melee with an ability to shoot. I like it in general and that was the reason why I took them in 2nd edition. I simply like such units that can be more flexible.

In 3rd edition chariots are different so I need to learn how to use them again. I guess with the 2nd draft I went for a bit more straightforward approach where units have their roles defined already.

I noticed that Chariots do not suffer -1 to hit penalty against Phalanx but they still lose their Thunderous Charge. Because Chariots are Me4+, they would be hitting exactly the same against Phalanx as any heavy cavalry regiment but with fewer attacks.