[FONT=arial]BUILDING A WHFB ARMY LIST[/FONT]

Getting started, it has been brought to my attention that this tutorial revolves around the definitions I give to a lot of the "technical" terminology I use. So, here are some definitions to aid you in understanding and engaging this tutorial.

List Building
Tactical Elements: The assets available to the army (i.e. the choices that you have for your list).
Tactical Capabilities: The roles or functions that each Tactical Element has available.
**Strategic Concept: A simple statement about how your army is going to win.
Supporting Capabilities: The Tactical Capabilities in your army that support your Strategic Concept
Utility
Tactical Utility: A measure of the quality and quantity of capabilities available to a Tactical Element.
Value: A measure of the quality of the Tactical Element relative to its cost.
Core Tactical Element: The primary Tactical Elements that allow the army to achieve the Strategic Concept.
Supporting Tactical Element: The Tactical Elements that provide secondary and other capabilities to the army in support of the Strategic Concept or aid the main elements in executing the strategic concept.
Utility Lifespan: The point in the battle at which a Tactical Element/Capability ceases to be a critical asset.
Force Maneuver
Deploy
**Deployment Scheme: A simple, general statement on how your forces should be deployed in order to achieve your Strategic Concept.
Deployment Option: A choice that is made for each Tactical Element with the goal of maximizing its impact on the battle while potentially minimizing the impact of an opponent's Tactical Element.
Maneuver
**Maneuver Scheme: A simple, general statement on how your forces should conduct themselves during the battle in order to achieve your Strategic Concept.
Situation: An assessment of the battlefield, including possible deployment zones for your own forces and your opponent's forces, as well as the impacts of terrain (choke points, visibility, barriers to movement).
Area of Interest: The areas of the battlefield that have the potential to be utilized by friendly and enemy Tactical Elements, determined as deployment progresses.
Area of Operations: The area of the battlefield that you expect will come into play based on the finished deployment.
Mission: The goals for your Tactical Elements to accomplish in the battle in order to achieve victory by means of your Strategic Concept.
Execution: The choices and actions you take in order to accomplish the Mission with regards to your Strategic Concept, Deployment Scheme, and Maneuver Scheme.
Fragmentation Order: A change to a Tactical Element's mission as a result of an opponent's decision or other events during the course of the battle.
Mobility Scheme: Where will your Tactical Elements move, and why?
Obscuring Scheme: Which of your Tactical Elements need to be screened from the enemy?
Intelligence Scheme (for closed-list play): What information about your army is critical for the enemy to know, and how can they determine it?
Command and Control: deploy and maneuver constraints for maximizing the effectiveness of the army general, battle standard, and characters.

1. The first thing any general wants to do in developing a force for any fight is to consider what sorts of troops he or she has and what their roles are on the field of battle. This is really simple in theory, but it can be more difficult than one might imagine in practice. In other words, assess your assets. Imagine yourself as an ancient Israelite king or warlord for a moment. You have the Egyptians from the south and the Assyrians and Hittites from the north, not to mention the Babylonians to the east and Philistines to the west... Each other civilization has its own military foci. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses, but you may not be able to address all of those potential strengths in your force since there's such a wide diversity in the potential threats you may encounter on the battlefield. So, start by evaluating what sort of force you can build that will work well on its own terms!

As this ancient Israelite leader, imagine yourself assessing your assets: you have access mostly to peasant militias with clubs, slings, and other non-metal weaponry. You have access to a small class of wealthier countrymen who can afford metal weapons, spears, bows, and even some armor. Finally, you have the miniscule standing force that serves as the king's body guard and core of any army. You have almost no cavalry or chariots, so you really have to give up trying to face any of your enemies in the open plains. (Historically, the Hebrew people inhabited the hill country almost exclusively, since chariots and horses were extraordinarily expensive and could only function at significant disadvantage in rough terrain.) So, assuming you'll fight your battles defensively in rough or difficult terrain, which of your assets provide the most effective means of eliminating your enemies--whomever they may be?

This is basically what you're doing when you build your army list in WHFB! For Dwarf players, the above example may be a good one, since the movement phase of the game tends to be a sore spot for a lot of Dwarf generals. (How I miss the days of the Rune of Oath and Honour!) Each asset is called a tactical element, or element for short. Assessing your assets is probably the most important thing you will do in building your army list next to developing a strategic concept, which we will address in the next section. What exactly does it mean to assess your assets?

First, think of the nature of the tactical element. It might be helpful to use an example here. Let's take regular Dwarf Warriors for starters, since they're pretty straight forward. Warriors have no ranged capabilities, meaning that they have only melee capabilities. Movement is a consideration, as well, which we'll talk about in a moment. So, understanding Warriors as a purely melee tactical element will have significant implications as you select them for inclusion in your list. Now, consider what functions melee tactical elements might have on the battlefield. Basically, there are two. (Let me know if you think of others.) First, they can kill stuff (the conventional jargon for such a melee tactical element is hammer). Second, they can die as slowly as possible (the conventional jargon for such a melee tactical element is anvil or points-denial). The equipment you choose for your Dwarf Warriors, then, will be highly influenced by the role or function you intend the unit to play in your army.

Movement can be its own tactical capability! (The conventional jargon for purely movement tactical capabilities is chaff or redirectors.) Dwarfs have preciously little access to these capabilities. Examples include Gyrocopters and single-column, 5-model Slayer units called "Slayer bolts". Other armies have excellent options for these units, such as Furies from Daemons of Chaos or Dire Wolves from Vampire Counts. The point of such units is merely to have something in a particular location at a particular point in time in order to gain or maintain spacial control of the battlefield. (In our historically-inspired vignette above, chariots excelled at controlling space on a battlefield as well as providing great offensive tactical capabilities in their own right, making them truly the terror weapon of ancient warfare.) A good WHFB example of this might be using a unit of High Elf Shadow Warriors to block the Vanguard moves of a unit of Bretonnian Pegasus Knights.

The role or function a unit plays in your force is called its tactical capability. Sometimes a unit may provide more than one tactical capability, though it is usually problematic to build a multi-functional unit into a force as a critical strategic asset. We'll talk more about that later, too.

Go through the entire spectrum of tactical elements available to you. (In WHFB terms, this means going through all the units and Runes and such in the entire Dwarf army book, for example.) Based on the options each unit has available to it, determine its potential tactical capabilities and what equipment you need to provide the unit with in order to best perform each of those potential tactical capabilities.

>>> I suggest Greyhnir's handbook as a useful tool for helping you assess your assets: http://www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/43675-greyhnirs-8th-edition-dwarf-handbook/

Now you've assessed your assets and are ready to move on to the next step: developing a strategic concept!

2. The second thing any general wants to do in developing a force for any fight is to consider how he or she wants his or her army to engage the enemy force. Again, this is an internal decision, integral to the function of your force and should not be dictated by the nature of your possible opponent(s). This task takes a good amount of ability to synthesize the assessment of your assets you just did in the prior task! Given the tactical capabilities of your force, then, imagine the possible ways a force with access to those particular assets might engage an enemy force. This should take the lion's share of your time and thought! This is also the most important task in building an army list for a game of Warhammer! We call this developing your strategic concept. Your strategic concept should be simple, not complicated, and it should also have nothing to do whatsoever with a specific deployment or movement on the battlefield. Those sorts of things should be considered, but they should be considered as particular applications of your force organization theory. In other words, you build your army list and THEN consider specific tactical applications. Your list of available strategic concepts for any given faction will not be large. For example, you just don't ever see Beastmen "gunlines" or Chaos Dwarf "Light Councils". This is a good comparison, by the way, since both "gunlines" and "Light Councils" operate using the same strategic concept: shoot the enemy and hope there's nothing left to mop up/mop up whatever is left. To get you started, here are a few example strategic concepts for your consideration.
A.) Shoot the enemy until there's nothing left.
B.) Shoot the enemy's critical targets and mop up what's left.
C.) Take the enemy by surprise and bring overwhelming force to bear against a portion of the enemy force.
D.) Engage the enemy force in close combat to the enemy's disadvantage.
E.) Shoot the enemy while avoiding retaliation.
F.) Disorient the enemy with target saturation and exploit critical errors.
You might start to get the idea quickly, or it may take some time for this idea to sink in. Whatever the case, give it plenty of time processing. Sleep on it. You might want to take a break from reading this tutorial right now so you can contemplate and come back in a couple days when the pot's been stirred, so to speak.

Choosing your strategic concept is the most fundamental, most critical event in the force organization process!

3. The third thing any general wants to do in developing a force for any fight is to consider what tactical capabilities support his or her chosen strategic concept. If your strategic concept is to trample your enemy under the hooves of your Knights' horses (see D above), you probably want to have a unit of Knights with whose horses you may trample your enemies underfoot! It really isn't any more complicated than that! Now, just because it's not complicated doesn't mean it won't be difficult. (Ha! Just like that last sentence.) But seriously, you'll want to ascertain which tactical capabilities support your strategic concept. Let's go back to our historical vignette. As a Hebrew military leader, I decide I want to disorient the enemy with target saturation and exploit critical errors. (This is the typical strategic concept for most guerrilla warfare.) I decide I need mostly ranged capabilities in order to draw the enemy's attention. But then, I know I also want some melee capabilities in order to prevent those ranged units from being isolated and destroyed piecemeal. I only have so much grain-beer to pay my troops (points to build my list), though, so I have to be careful how I distribute these tactical capabilities. In the end, I decide that I will have to also provide myself a command-and-control tactical capability to maintain the coordinated efforts of my other capabilities on the battlefield.

Notice I haven't even chosen any actual units (tactical elements) yet, much less their equipment! Choosing supporting tactical capabilities is the third step. Once you've chosen your supporting capabilities, you can move on to the next step. First, however, you'll really want to put some time and thought into this step, because it's quite a lot more important than the next step. In fact, from this point on, each successive step diminishes in its importance to your force organization process!

It's worth taking the time to discern in what ways a tactical capability that may initially seem to obviously not support your strategic concept might actually prove an extremely supportive capability after all! For example, if you're going with the example of the Knights above, you might imagine what sorts of weaknesses your army will have if all you bring to the table is a tray full of Knights! What might you bring that will help those Knights do their job? A unit of Peasant Bowmen, for example, might be able to clear out chaff seeking to block a critical charge, or a Field Trebuchet might cut a swathe into a unit of infantry with which your Knights might otherwise become bogged-down after the initial charge, unable to continue their intended function.

4. The fourth thing any general wants to do in developing a force for any fight is to consider what tactical elements will provide the desired tactical capabilities that support your overarching strategic concept. This is the step where you choose the units you actually want to include in your army!

There are a couple of criteria for choosing one unit over another, and this piece of the puzzle will again engage your best efforts in channeling your inner Mentat.
A.) Choose each unit (tactical element) with only ONE (1) (UNO) (EINS) tactical capability in mind! As I alluded to earlier, if you start choosing units with multiple functions or battlefield roles in mind, you're not going to know what to do with the unit once your army makes first contact with the enemy force! (Once you become proficient in this process, you might be able to adlib a little. In fact, I do hope you are able to eventually get to that point! But that takes the ability to synthesize a lot of moving concepts and is not something beginners are typically ready to do.) Dwarf Quarrellers are often the subject of this sort of abuse. People often think that, since they can equip Quarrellers with Great Weapons, Quarrellers can function as both offensive/melee and defensive/ranged capabilities. The result is that, especially new players will spend a good portion of the battle moving or reforming their Quarrellers and never use them in the expected function of ranged support, while others will fail to move them at all only to have them charged by something that outclasses them in combat before they have the chance to function as a hammer unit.
B.) Choose each unit with consideration for its cost-efficiency and point-per-model cost. Dwarf Rangers upgraded to Bugman's Rangers are a good example of a difficult case. At 17 points per model, Bugman's Rangers are quite expensive. They do have great statistics and the ability to scout, so taking them as a tactical element is extremely dependent on one's chosen strategic concept. They can't be taken as a "Swiss army knife" type of unit, because they're too expensive, take too great of an investment, and are too big of a target for the enemy. Alternatives, such as regular Dwarf Rangers or Dwarf Quarrellers with Great Weapons might be preferable, since they're cheaper per model and tend to be slightly more cost-efficient.
C.) Choose each unit with its priority in mind. By this, I mean that you will have some units that are obviously primary and others that are obviously secondary or even tertiary in importance based on their tactical capabilities. Give first pick to your primary elements that most directly support your strategic concept, and for newer players, I advise that you try to stick with all primary elements at first. Secondary and tertiary tactical elements should be support elements that are meant to enhance the ability of primary elements to execute the strategic concept of the force.

5. Pick your equipment and options for your tactical elements with the intention of giving your tactical elements the tools they need to best and most efficiently execute their intended tactical capability. For example, Dwarf Warriors intended as a hammer unit will obviously need Great Weapons; shields might help their survivability against enemy shooting, but that's of peripheral importance to their intended tactical capability.

Well, there you have it, folks! Those are my five steps to building a WHFB army list based on my force organization theory. I hope y'all will get something out of it! Good luck in all your battles!

A NOTE ON TACTICAL UTILITY:

The utility of tactical elements is difficult to address, because very little formal theory is available on the subject. I find it odd to some extent, but then, I am also not surprised. Military doctrine has only been a formal scientific discipline for a very brief amount of time in the grand scheme of military history, and even then, military strategists are not typically also good scientists. Therefore, the following is largely original theory I have worked on just in the last couple days since posting the above tutorial, so I respectfully request your deference.

First, let us define the term utility. Utility simply refers to the usefulness of something. More broadly, and more specifically in this context, utility refers to the quality of practical use—and the amount of such use—in a tactical environment. It may also be helpful to reflect on the difference between strategy and tactics, two terms used colloquially without formal distinction, and therefore, interchangeably. Strategy, in a formal military sense, refers to the overarching goal and plan to obtain that goal. Strategy therefore includes all capabilities—military or otherwise—available for obtaining that goal. The “goal” is referred to as an end state. Tactics, then, refers to the use of individual elements in their capability roles in support of the strategic concept. To put it another way, strategy is what we do with our brains to develop plans and implement operations, while tactics is what we actually do on the ground, so to speak, when physically engaging the enemy.

So, tactical utility thus refers to the quality and quantity of the usable practical application of tactical elements in-game for the purpose of our discussion here regarding WHFB. Tactical utility deals largely with the capability management of tactical elements on the field of battle, so another way to think about this in simpler terms is to imagine that once we have developed a general idea of what our army will look like, it is time to analyze how the units we’ve chosen—and the particular designs we’ve given them (including number, equipment, command groups, characters, magic items, etc.)—might function individually as elements and together as a whole force.

Utility varies in either quality, quantity, or both from tactical element to tactical element. For the purposes of this discussion, a “high-utility” tactical element has a broad base of applicable utility (i.e. the tactical element has multiple capabilities that support the strategic concept of the force), while a “low-utility” tactical element has a narrow or specific base of applicable utility (i.e. the tactical element has only a single capability that supports the strategic concept of the force). (This means that a high-utility tactical element may actually be less useful than a low-utility tactical element, so try to make that distinction clear when analyzing any particular unit.) The quality of the utility of a tactical element—a unit’s actual usefulness in terms of its ability to function in its tactical capability or capabilities—can be referred to as its value. Value follows suit. So, if we were to have a unit we wanted to describe as being good at only one thing but excellent at that one thing, we would call it a “low-utility, high-value tactical element”. (Again, fight the temptation to confuse the use of value with the tactical element’s cost in points or essential nature to your force; the former is irrelevant for this discussion, while the latter is addressed below.)

Next, we’ll look at the utility roles of our tactical elements.

Core tactical elements are those that are most fundamental to your force because they enable the force to function at all. (These are not necessarily Core choices from your army book, just to avoid confusion.) These are often the first options you decide on when actually choosing your tactical elements, since without them, your force would be completely unable to function in line with your chosen strategic concept. Core tactical elements, then, are the fundamental building blocks, the foundation if you will, to your force. For example, if my strategic concept is to engage the enemy with overwhelming force in close combat, my core tactical elements will be those that provide overwhelming melee combat capabilities. Core tactical elements are typically low-utility, high-value units.

Support tactical elements are those that contribute secondary or other tactical capabilities in support of the strategic concept of the force. These come in two types: specialty (or specialized) tactical elements and utility tactical elements. Specialized tactical elements are almost invariably low-utility with medium to high value. Think for a moment about the sorts of units that might fit this description in your army book in the context of any particular strategic concept. You might use a unit in one army as a support tactical element that would be used as a core tactical element in another army you might build from the same army book! Utility tactical elements are almost invariably high-utility but may encompass the spectrum from high to low value! Dwarf Rangers are a good example of a utility tactical element, especially in small numbers. They are almost worthless in terms of their ability to function in most of their tactical capabilities, but they often have such a broad application that they appear in a very large number of Dwarf players’ armies since the new 8th edition Dwarf book was released! Utility tactical elements typically provide a range of capabilities and are therefore some of the most tactically flexible units in any army. The key to using these successfully is knowing when and where to apply each of their available tactical capabilities in various contexts.

TACTICAL ELEMENTS AND UTILITY

Now that we’ve defined our terms, let us consider some practical implications of the theory we’ve covered. This next section will be a guide for evaluating the utility of various tactical elements. Again, for ease of use, I've provided sequential steps to enable the evaluation and selection process. Before I begin, I think it's important to state that a lot of what I'm about to spell out here is mostly stuff we typically do naturally, without even thinking about it. The brain, being the marvelously sophisticated computer it is, constantly works through millions of pieces of data, synthesizing and evaluating to come to resolution on millions of decisions every day. So, what I want to do here is to take what we often leave to our unconscious or unintentional cognitive processes and make those decisions conscious and intentional ones. Obviously, it's easier said than done.

1. The first thing you'll always want to do in evaluating the utility of various tactical elements is to determine to which tactical elements you have access. For example, if I'm a Dwarf player, I decide my strategic concept is something along the lines of "shoot the enemy and mop up what's left". For this strategic concept, I then decide I need to have a unit to do the mopping up, as it were. Now, I look at my choices for filling the tactical capability of "mopping up". (Tactical capabilities are usually referred to in more formal terms, so let's just say we're looking for a low-utility, high-value offensive melee capability.) Dwarfs happen to have a lot of very good options in these regards: anything that will have a good chance of destroying an enemy element in close combat will do. Sounds like a job for Great Weapons to me. So, Warriors, Longbeards, Hammerers, Quarrellers, Slayers, Miners, and Rangers all have access to Great Weapons, so this will fill your initial list of options for this example. Any of these units can theoretically do the job, so don't immediately limit your options. At this point, it's important to keep your options broad, because an element you initially dismiss might actually be the best option after all.

2. Next, consider whether any of these options would tempt you to use them as a different tactical capability. If it does tempt you too much, the end result leaves you forcing yourself into difficult decisions. That's bad. Some armies are simply built on this strategic concept: force the enemy to make difficult tactical decisions and exploit critical errors! If you're adding difficult tactical decisions to yourself, you're either 1) a paragon of tactical genius, or 2) an idiot. I'm most often the latter for the simple reason I fancy myself the former! I might exaggerate, but it's for a point. Be aware of this tendency in yourself and fight the urge to give in to your own hubris. It will take time and effort to become proficient in the use of some units (usually medium to high-utility tactical elements), and until such a time as you do, decide how you want to use the unit beforehand and stick to it save for the most dire situations. In doing so, you're likely to make some errors in judgment, which your opponents will sometimes be quick to exploit, but that's alright. You'll be better off in the end, because if you're consistent in your tactical application of a unit in its intended tactical capability, you'll be better able to see when, how, and why you might utilize a unit in a different capacity in the future.
A good example might be Quarrellers with Great Weapons. The most common tactical decisions with these doughty fellows are when/if to reform prior to combat and when/if to charge an enemy unit. Those decisions sound simple enough, but in-game, they take on a life of their own! What may seem a good decision to reform before an impending enemy charge might be exploited by your opponent when the enemy decides not to charge and instead move up, in which case your unit loses precious opportunity to shoot and precious attacks in close combat if you decide to charge your opponent’s unit. Don't reform, and now you're risking losing Steadfast against an enemy unit charging in. Andy Spears is known for his Dwarf armies that utilize GW Quarrellers, but most Dwarf players can't just pick up that army and have good success with it until they gain good experience using GW Quarrellers and are able to discern the various critical tactical decisions they need to make and how to best execute those decisions.
As you advance in skill and your overall ability to synthesize the tactical capabilities of any given army, you'll eventually be able to intentionally select tactical elements in respect to utility, prioritizing the tactical capabilities a unit may offer. This is one of the things good generals do extremely well, and it ultimately enables a player to be flexible in his or her tactical application of elements in-game.

3. Assess the risk! Do a risk assessment based on your temptation to use a tactical element in more than a single capacity (tactical capability). Weigh the various tactical decisions with which you may be presented in light of the probable outcome of each decision. (This is advanced stuff, so if you're not ready for this, stick with the basics and come back after a few games.)
Assessing the risk is often a gut-check. It's often very subjective. This is where some math can really help, because sometimes your gut is undecided. You see this all the time on forums. People ask, "Should I take White Lions or Phoenix Guard?" or "Should I take Hammerers or Ironbreakers?" These are perfect examples of people struggling with this gut-check. Running the numbers, so to speak, can really help bring clarity to our cognition, even while we still have to wrestle with issues revolving around probabilities and potentialities. A Mentat needs data, right? That said, if you feel the risk of you making a critical error in judgment regarding the flexible tactical use of any particular tactical element is low, by all means I encourage you to try out those multi-functional units!

4. Once you have assessed the risk and determined whether or not each tactical element is a viable option, filter out all the dropped selections from your mind. They'll just cloud your judgment. You need a hard-and-fast decision for now. You can always come back to those other tactical elements when you build another army list in the future. Remember here, your first instinct is usually your best in these cases if you're being intentional about thinking clearly and logically in your risk assessment, so listen to that first instinct. (You'll come back to this step again later. Remember, this is a process.) I often take days to filter out the old ideas that I've decided I need to drop in order to concentrate on moving forward in building my army list. Sometimes it merely takes a few seconds to find clarity. Whatever you do, remember this is a process that you have to work through, so give your brain time to do its work. Some of the best things you can do to help your brain is to get some good physical exercise, eat healthily, and stick to a regular sleep schedule. Do those things, and your ability to do everything in life increases dramatically, not to mention your ability to put together a good army list for a game of WHFB! When I'm stuck on a decision, either sleeping on it or doing some pushups helps me. When I wake up, I often find my brain has made the decision during the night while I slept, or when I come back to my desk, I find the pushups have rushed blood to my brain so that it suddenly feels fresh, quick, and discerning!

5. Now, go back to Steps 1-4! Assume you no longer have access to the tactical elements you previously dropped. Once you've gone through these steps--sometimes once, sometimes several times--you should have made your decision to include a particular tactical element in your army list. If so, move on to Step 6. Sometimes, however, you may be left with a multiplicity of viable options. In that case, you'll move on to Step 6 and the rest of the process, but you'll have to come back after deciding on a single tactical element.

6. Consider the utility of the unit in relation to the other choices you have made or will likely make for inclusion of tactical elements in your force. Ask yourself questions about the unit(s) you're trying to decide on that seek to evaluate them. Does this unit add critical, redundant, or superfluous support to each of its tactical capabilities? Does this unit compete with other options? If its tactical capability is redundant, would another unit provide more effective redundancy? Try to determine the overall niche the unit fills amongst the other tactical elements in your army. Can you imagine it working in tandem with other units? If it's a tactically flexible unit (i.e. it possesses multiple tactical capabilities—high-utility), do any of its secondary or tertiary capabilities risk interfering with those of other units? Sometimes it's good to write these down. You can get a better picture of what the unit's interaction will look like with the rest of the army. To continue with the example above, Great Weapon Quarrellers might provide good redundancy with their capacity to engage in supportive small-arms fire. What your Organ Gun can't kill, your Quarrellers might be able to finish off. On the other hand, will your Quarrellers compete with your Hammerers for a late-game charge? Do you risk getting them overextended if they make a charge that your Hammerers can't complete? Do they pose a liability if they give up their points too easily? Is the impact they might make in close combat worth the additional 2 points per model to equip them with Great Weapons? Continue to ask yourself questions like these until you feel like you can make a good evaluative judgment and come to a resolution as to your tactical use of the unit in-game.

7. Next, evaluate the tactical element in terms of its overall utility. In other words, make sure you can give an emphatic answer to this question: Is this tactical element a critical asset (i.e. core tactical element) or a support asset (i.e. specialized or utility tactical element)? It might feel counterintuitive to ask this question towards the end of the process. But really, all your work up to this point has been for the purpose of being able to answer this simple question! This will tell you whether or not the unit is expendable. Notice this evaluation has nothing to do with the unit's cost! It has everything to do with your mentality towards the unit's tactical use in-game. If it's a critical asset, meaning that your army cannot function without it, treat it as such. If it's a support element, meaning that your army can function without it, treat it as such.

8. Finally, determine the unit's utility lifespan. Even your core tactical elements have a utility lifespan, a point at which they cease to be critical assets. At what point will this particular tactical element cease to be combat-effective? This may mean different things for different elements. Cannons may become liabilities once units get into close combat, or they may become combat-ineffective once they have eliminated priority targets, for example. Multi-functional units (high-utility tactical elements) will have longer utility lifespans overall, since they only cease to be combat-effective once they do so in all their tactical capabilities. However, it's good to know when such a unit will become combat-ineffective in each of its tactical capabilities.

9. If you still have multiple viable options, go back to Step 6--or even Step 1! Follow this process in selecting each of your units. You'll have many variables to consider, so take your time and think over each carefully before moving on.

[FONT=arial]Deployment and Maneuver[/FONT]

I was hesitant to include a section on maneuver and maneuver command and control with the forgoing force organization tutorial. The two are just so vastly different in nature! However, I decided to include the following sections on the basis of the connection that does exist, despite whatever fundamental differences may also exist. On the other hand, it is very important to recognize the hard break that exists between force organization and force maneuver! Force organization tends to have finite parameters, because your force is developed by you, the organizer, and is not subject to the immediate responses of your opponent. (Now, I've tried this before, where my opponent and I built our lists together, reacting to each other's decisions in real time. Not only did it take about five hours to finish our lists (because we constantly changed our lists in reaction to the other's changes, etc.), but we also ended up with armies completely tailored to one another (6th edition Dwarfs v. High Elves), resulting in a rather abusive game that neither of us ended up enjoying.) On the other hand, maneuver (colloquially referred to as "tactics") is fundamentally influenced by your opponent's decisions and therefore nearly infinite in terms of possibilities!

Another important point to remember is that deployment is a particular task within maneuver. I will treat deployment and maneuver separately here for the sake of contextualization to WHFB. That said, consider the implications as we discuss each concept in turn, because we will come back to the connection between the two thereafter.

Deployment

1. Develop an overall deployment scheme. Remember to be flexible here. Your deployment scheme should be based on your overall strategic concept of the force. For example, if your strategic concept is to shoot the enemy and hope nothing's left after the smoke clears, you probably want to deploy deep and exploit terrain. Your deployment scheme should be short and extremely general in nature, much like your strategic concept. It should also be simple. If you're drawing up maps and using sand tables to try to project the development of an enemy contact, you're doing it wrong. You cannot predict beforehand where and how your opponent will deploy and move his or her tactical elements on the battlefield--unless you happen have the powers of prescience of the god emperor; therefore, projecting your decisions on the basis of an imaginary opponent's imaginary decisions is essentially meaningless conjecture, neither informed nor informative. This is one of the reasons that new players tend to lose a lot of their early games. They need the real experience that enables real knowledge and real data for synthesis. It's like a blacksmith trying to imagine himself making an ingot and deciding beforehand how he will strike the metal with his hammer and how many times he will have to douse it in the water and reheat it before it's finished. He won't have any real knowledge of such things until he looks at the ore and starts to work with it!

2. Once you've developed a scheme for the deployment of your force, start to evaluate the deployment options of each of your tactical elements. You should have considered this to some extent in building your army. This will give you some idea as to where that particular element may best fit into your overall deployment scheme. Make a list of deployment options for each, but don't decide yet how or where you will deploy your elements. First consider deployment of groups of tactical elements. Not only may there be groups of elements in your force that you can identify as having similar deployment options, but there may also be multiple tactical elements that should be deployed together or in some sort of relationship to one another. Write down these patterns and analyze them until you start to discern relationships between those patterns. Once you do, you can then go back and start to finalize specific plans for deployment of individual tactical elements.

Remember that once you've developed a finalized plan for deployment, no plan ever survives first contact. If you try to make your plan prescriptive, it will completely derail your deployment by robbing it of adaptability! You have to stay flexible and adaptable with your deployment plan and be able to apply your deployment analysis to your specific context and dynamic situation in each battle against each enemy you face.

Deployment dictates a tactical element's maximum possible impact on a battle. Use this knowledge to your advantage. Once your opponent deploys an enemy element, take a moment to define that element's maximum potential impact on the battle, especially if you have elements of your own not yet deployed.

[FONT=arial]Maneuver[/FONT]

By maneuver, I mean overall tactical operation in combat. I use this term for two main reasons: 1) it provides a familiar military term for our purpose, and 2) it's a general enough term to cover the whole spectrum of battlefield operations. There may very well be a better term available, and I want to make it clear that I am not using this term in its formal and technical military sense. Rather, I'm adapting it for use in our discussion regarding the application of tactical elements on the battlefield.

Maneuver is probably the most difficult concept for which to develop guiding principles! So many variables are involved, exponentially more than even those involved in deployment, because of the mercurial nature of your opponent's interactions and reactions in fluidity with your own through the course of a battle. Good practice in maneuver demands constant--almost perennial--analysis, synthesis, resolution, and execution. Get ready to think extremely broadly and critically, because any principles developed for maneuver must necessarily take into consideration the myriad variables involved therein!

The following is a PROCESS! You'll have to continue all of the following steps, restarting and going through them all during each turn probably multiple times, if not many times! It takes a lot of practice to develop this process as a natural way of thinking through your tactical decisions, so don't think you'll be able to master these concepts after a single game--or ten--or even one hundred games!

1. Develop a scheme of maneuver. Much like your scheme of deployment, your scheme of maneuver needs to be brief, concise, broad, and simple. Again, this should be based on your strategic concept. For example, if your strategic concept is to shoot your enemy and hope there's nothing left, then I would suspect your scheme of maneuver would be something along the lines of "static line of fire, forming ranks prior to impact" or similar. Once you've developed your scheme of maneuver, you're ready to take your force to battle.

2. At the start of your game, consider the following things. You'll have to reassess your scheme of maneuver and adapt it to the unfolding situation throughout a battle. A good rule of thumb is to reassess at the beginning of each movement phase. (Remember that you'll start this process even prior to deployment and includes deployment! I mentioned above that deployment sets the parameters of enemy elements' maximum possible impact on the battle, but it bears mention here that it works both ways: deployment of your own elements establishes the parameters of their maximum possible impact on the battle.)

A.) Situation: First, consider the area of interest. This includes the entirety of the battlefield. Note the possible deployment areas (especially in consideration of the possible scenarios for the game). Note the terrain, its relationships with the possible deployment zones and with its potential impact on both deployment of friendly and enemy elements and on their maneuver thereafter. Impressions are important at this point, not specifics, so look for choke points, barriers to movement, areas of limited visibility, etc. Once you've begun deployment, refocus your scope of interest. Note the areas of the battlefield that are likely to be affected by friendly or enemy elements and that are likely to influence friendly and enemy elements. By the time deployment has been completed, you should be able to tentatively define the outside limits of the area of operations. This is usually easiest to determine in smaller games, just by looking at the deployment of friendly and enemy forces, what areas of the battlefield make up your area of operations. Your area of operations is going to be a subset of your area of interest. Try to block off the sections of the board that are not likely to affect the battle. Don't forget about these areas, but sectioning out various areas of the battlefield--and especially your area of operations, the area with which you're concerned in reference to your tactical elements and their interaction and engagement with enemy elements--will give you a better grasp of the area with which you should allow your attention to be absorbed so that you limit the peripheral influences on your attention and keep the important things as the primary influences on your command and control. Be aware that in larger games especially, your area of operations may actually be synonymous with your area of interest. It may also be helpful to take a moment to consider the area of interest and area of operations of each of your individual elements.

Also consider your mission. Each of the standard scenarios has its own set of criteria for completion--victory conditions. Give thought to these and consider how your deployment and maneuver should work towards obtaining those objectives. Many times, other objectives may also be involved, especially in tournaments and in narrative games and campaigns.

In turn, decide early what tasks or missions you want each of your tactical elements to complete over the course of the battle. These individual tasks should be practical applications of your strategic concept and scheme of maneuver, taking your scheme of deployment into consideration. Consider at the same time which missions are related and the individual elements tasked with those missions. Patterns should readily manifest themselves. Once they do, use those patterns to develop relationships in order to better enable your tactical elements to accomplish their missions. For example, you decide you want to tie up an enemy element with a bus of Swordsmen, while you want to demolish an adjacent enemy element with your Greatswords. It may be wise in that situation to attempt to deploy each across from its respective target and then move those elements in such a way as to increase the probability of those elements making contact with their respective enemy targets. You don't want to have your Greatswords slogging across the entire battlefield only to show up, too little too late. Of course, that's an extreme and limited example, but it should provide some imagination for seeing relationships between the mission or objective patterns of maneuver between elements within your force. Some of these relationships and patterns may have been completely intentional and planned prior to the game. If so, take these into consideration as well, but don't be too afraid to divorce from those relationships and patterns in order to serve the greater overarching strategic concept.

B.) Mission: Next, consider the mission. You've already done this to a certain extent. The point here is to make explicit the correlations between your strategic concept, scheme of deployment, and scheme of maneuver and the victory conditions of the battle. These correlations should present themselves naturally and obviously. If you find yourself thinking for too long about this, you've probably been inconsistent in developing your maneuver and deployment schemes, or your force may not ultimately support your strategic concept. If you find this occurring more than once or twice hereafter, you probably need to revisit the way you're allowing your strategic concept to meaningfully inform your force organization and force maneuver.

A good idea might be to write down your overall mission(s) and attach this with a paperclip or something to the front of your order of battle/army list. This will keep you thinking in terms of the main goal being the main goal! Keep this in front of you so that you actively allow it to inform your decisions. I can't tell you how often I've become so involved in destroying the enemy army, only to discover I've taken too long to get around to the main goal of taking and holding the Watchtower before the game ends, leaving my opponent with the victory despite me being up more than a thousand victory points!

C.) Execution: This piece of the puzzle basically formalizes your intent to accomplish the mission and obtain the victory. Execution spells out HOW you intend to carry out your plan--the entirety of your strategic concept, scheme of deployment, and scheme of maneuver from start to finish. Remember, at this point you're still subject to your opponent's decisions, so stay flexible and be ready to adapt to the unfolding situation. In the United States Army, we use something called a FRAGO--a fragmentation order--that can modify or entirely change the unit's mission in the middle of our attempt to complete the mission we were previously given. Suddenly, we find ourselves directed towards an entirely different objective, and sometimes that means completely abandoning our current position, no matter how hard we just worked to dig in and fortify it! Don't be afraid to scrap your original intent as a battle develops in the event something happens unexpectedly and unfortunately. Nothing--or very little, at least--should really take you by surprise, if you've followed the process I've laid out, because you should have anticipated most, if not all, of your potential risks; and if you've anticipated risks and continued with your plan unchanged, you've decided that those risks are acceptable risks.

Plan your scheme of mobility--where will your units move, and why will they move there? Consider counter mobility, too. Where are enemy elements located, what are their relationships to your own elements, and what are the possible lanes or patterns of mobility available to those enemy elements? Are any of those potentialities seriously threatening to your own elements and scheme of mobility? What contingencies are available to you to counter those enemy elements or block the possible lanes of mobility that pose significant threats?

Consider your scheme for obscuring the battlefield. Which of your elements need to be screened from the enemy force, and how can you screen them? Are there other elements you can use to screen them, or can you use terrain as a screen? Think about your opponent's scheme for obscuring the battlefield. How is he or she doing so? More practically speaking, obscuring involves such things as the notorious "dog screen" in front of a unit of Skull Crushers, reforming units to pull them out of an enemy element's charge arc, or hiding a Heirotitan behind a building. Even things like Alith Anar's passive ability to give enemies -1 to hit or the Skaven Storm Banner should be incorporated into your scheme of obscuration.

If you play closed-list games, a scheme of intelligence may be applicable. Since most players at least have access to information regarding the strategic and tactical options available to their opponents, we won't go into this too deeply; but consider how much familiarity you have with the enemy force and how much experience you have fighting that particular faction. Even if you have little or no knowledge of an enemy's force and playing a closed-list game, you can sometimes extrapolate a lot of information from experiences you've had against armies with similar strategic concepts.

D.) Command and Control: Now, consider your command and control. The most important elements in your force for this piece of your scheme of maneuver will likely be your general and your BSB. Other characters, banners, and such may also be significant considerations. Often, your Battle Standard Bearer is actually more important than your general! Where does each need to be deployed? Where does each need to be in order to provide its unique capability to various portions of your force? As part of your scheme of maneuver, plan out when and where to move those command and control elements in order to best support your force by enabling it to perform its strategic concept to the best of its ability or to the greatest degree of efficiency, predictability, or reliability.

3. Now, I hope you can begin to see how your scheme of deployment is related so closely to your scheme of maneuver. Your scheme of deployment sets the maximum potential impact on the battle of each element, but it also sets the maximum potential impact on the battle of your entire force, since it delimits the impact of each element by setting its starting position! Your scheme of deployment can either enhance your scheme of maneuver or derail it altogether! Consider how your scheme of deployment delimits the maximum potential impact of your entire army on the enemy force.