Why go Stubborn?

[Gutlord Inquisitor]

Just because you commonly see an item doesn't mean that it is undercosted.  Nor does it mean that it is super effective.

If an item is something that is bought as a no-brainer for just about every army, yes it probably means it could be more expensive. 

Armies that do not invest in the crown
TK - unbreakable
Vamps - unbreakable
Daemons - unbreakable
Dwarfs - not available
Wood Elves - no unit worth putting it on

I would say Daemons are in the "no available" rather than "unbreakable" category. I would give my eye teeth to have the Stubborn Crown on my Keeper of Secrets. Yes they don't have it either way but the point is it would be a 1+ item for daemons too.

I'll give you Wood Elves as less likely to have it but certainly I've seen Wood Elf armies with the Stubborn Crown.

Armies that don't need it but may take it
Empire - priest can give unbreakable + tons of ranks, GS are naturally stubborn, and captians/generals give cold blooded

Empire always have it. I really don't think I've seen an Empire army at a tournament without it. With the new book I expect it to be even more of a no-brainer - even though Empire have tons of Stubborn units, I would expect one large unit of halberdiers to have it or if a large core unit of knights is used, for them to have it. Particularly now it passes on to the detachments, Empire will always have a crown.

Skaven - almost always steadfast

Not units designed to actually fight. If we're talking units of plague monks, storm vermin or similar, a stubborn crown is mandatory unless they bring a bell or a furnace. Only the swarm of slaves build really can rely on steadfast as a tarpit.

Goblins - Almost always steadfast

Rarely, unless people are bringing the 100+ units of goblins.

Warriors - multiple means of being stubborn, rarely loose combats for reasons other than charging into a poor match up

Unless the build is designed around the Stubborn banner or Chosenstar shenanigans, yes, the stubborn crown is a must. Chaos players that assume their units are going to win no matter what don't tend to get far.

Ogres - default spell of their base lore, win most combats that aren't poor match ups (ie don't charge 12 bulls into 30 witch elves) and those combats that are lost this way the crown will at best buy you 1 more turn of turtling in on yourself before dying

Well, matter of opinion really. I consider it a 1+ item and I would never make a list without it. I am not going to rely on 1) winning combat or 2) getting a critical spell off.

Dark Elves - Because the stubborn peg lord is so powerful there is practically no reason not to use him.  That said outside of that one character they don't need this item.

Of course they do! It's possible for mindrazor to get stopped once in a while.

Lizards - hard to kill units especially with slann support means they don't often give up combat res and any minor loses are going to be of minimum effect due to cold blooded.  There is an arguement for it on a unit that can't be supported by magic or 'just in case' but it's far from needed.

The fact that their most important unit with general/bsb in it gets stubborn as standard plus a lack of fighty characters used, yes, I'd say Lizards rarely use this item.

Out of this list, I would say we have
Wood Elves,
Lizards,
Some Skaven.
Some Goblins.

Armies that need and make use of the crown universally
Orcs - different from goblins in that they will not always be steadfast
Beastmen - little/no armor means that faster races have a big advantage in tilting combat agaisnt them
Bretts - while they don't loose combat often and NEVER want to be stuck in, if they whiff their charge round they struggle to generate CR so may end up loosing due to large flanks and lack of attack power.
High Elves - not particularly good at CC and expensive troops means that they can always make good use out of the crown.

Warriors - other than chosenstar build (which is often comped out), will typically have the crown
Dark Elves - yes, a stubborn peg OR just in the main line
Empire - always
Ogres - I've not seen them without it
Most competitive Skaven - not seeing the unbreakable blocks as much these days.

That makes most armies and note that those armies that you are dismissing don't mean the item isn't too good. Daemons would LOVE the stubborn crown and probably dwarfs too. While dwarfs have multiple access to stubborn, they would jump on a 35 point rune to make another unit stubborn!

Basically, all you've got to say for armies that aren't going to have a huge incentive to take the item are:
Undead have no real reason (although useful for combat reforms!)
Some Skaven, Wood Elves and Orc and Goblin builds (but most competitive builds still take it)
Lizardmen
Daemons and Dwarfs can't take it (but would if they could).

I'd say thats appropriate for a 35 pt item.

Most armies would pay much more than 35 points for the item and still consider it a 1+ item. Hell, I'd shell out 70 points in a beastman army for their version of stubborn.

Would you argue that the dispel scroll is OP because EVERY ARMY takes it?

I would say that it's undercosted, yeah. If an item is a 1+ regardless of circumstance, it's probably too cheap. I'd say the BSB is massively undercosted at 25 points these days. But since every army has it at the same price, it balances out. It isn't massively unreasonable that most armies would have a BSB as standard and since everyone gets the same value (minus undead, who often do without), it doesn't seem unfair to everyone. It also is worth an additional 100 victory points, which is much closer to the actual value of the BSB.

Just because something is undercosted, doesn't make it unfair. Just because something is unbalanced, doesn't make it undercosted. The hellheart seems about right in points - a good item that we ogre players often take, but not necessarily in every list and with points tight, this will get cut first. But its hideously unbalanced and can basically auto-win a game or do flat nothing.

The crown of command, however, is sufficiently cheap to be an auto-include for most armies and able to turn a certain defeat into a win on a regular basis, really a safety net for deathstars and fundamentally erodes the basic principles of tactics in the game into "kill the crownbearer or destroy the unit".

[Nihmwit]

spend a little time in the army lists or the know your enemy section of this website.  I think you'll find that your impressions about the crown being a "no-brainer, 1+" item are pretty unfounded.  I play with aggressive tactics, using a defensive list (units picked to survive, not necessarily dish out damage), so I use the crown.  Look around, and you'll find alot of the more aggresive combat-build list players here forgo the crown to take more offensively minded equipment.

[rothgar13]

I'd actually trust Gutlord's experience much more than I would a quick gander at the Army Lists section. That section of the forums has lists ranging from the new players to the casual players to the competitive players, whereas the majority of what Gutlord is quoting is hard tournament environments. That will give you a much better idea of what works and what doesn't.

[sitaavanu]

A few key points and thats all i'm gonna say in regaurds to this specific discussion of who does and doesn't take it.

I think your views are very slanted.  Specifically:

Ogres - I've not seen them without it

I know i don't use it.
Wildcard says he doesn't use it.
And a quick trip down the armies of the kindgdom section will yield multiple list on the first page that don't use it.
Basically as far as I'm concerned your pulling this one out your butt.

Empire always have it. I really don't think I've seen an Empire army at a tournament without it.

TVI is widely considered to be one of the best empire generals:
http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?topic=41294.msg672253#msg672253

notice what isn't there? stubborn hat
notice what is there? big units, and unbreakables

I don't use it, going through the first page of list being discussed not one list uses it.  A specific quote about the crown from the army discussion threads would be:

http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?topic=42129.msg695024#msg695024
2) Crown of Command is only worth it on a well protected character, otherwise it's just a costly gimmick. Especially with HtL and big units I think this is a bit of a waste. Equip your WP defensively or keep him cheap (heavy armour, shield) and use those points for that General.

So once again, absolutely nothing back up this statement.

Warriors - other than chosenstar build (which is often comped out), will typically have the crown

So are we discussing noncompettive warrior builds? at best this is a 50/50 item on wether or not it will make it into one of their list.  If you want I can go through their threads and copy and paste like i did with empire.

This deserves to be in the spot of taken but not neccessary.

dark elves

Basically I have no idea where you are coming from with this.
Stubborn peg lord is obvious.
outside of that the only units they bring either a) can't house characters b) are ranged and will die instantnly to a competent CC unit c) unbreakable. 

Once again taken but not manditory.

I would say that it's undercosted, yeah. If an item is a 1+ regardless of circumstance, it's probably too cheap. I'd say the BSB is massively undercosted at 25 points these days.

Claiming that the BSB and dispel scroll are undercosted I think shows how out of touch you are with what is an appropriate cost.  The game is fairly centric around these 2 options and gives us a good tool to gauge what the appropriate cost of upgrades/gear should be.

[Phazael]

Well as someone who played in 6 different GTs last year and two this one, I am pretty much with Gutlord on this.  In all of those five game events, essentially 40 different games in competitive formats, I faced a grand total of 8 armies that did not have the Crown somewhere.  Two were Daemons (one of whom incidentally had the stubborn banner on his BSB), two were Skaven who had multiple bell/cauldrons anyhow, one was a dwarf player,  two were lizardmen players both rocking the LD10 Slaan Templeguard Deathstar, and the last was Leenus who was kicking my ass up until one bad round of combat cost him the entire game specifically because he did not have the crown.  So the one person who should have had the crown but did not lost to me specifically because of its absence.  So 18 months of play on two coasts in 40 games saw it being used about 80% of the time, closer to 90% in armies with access to it.  I generally go 4-1 at most events, so its not like I am playing in the scrub table end of the room, either.

The Crown of Command is nearly ALWAYS worth it, practically over any other upgrades.  Any Lord level character can slot the crown and Talisman of Preservation and still have room for a sword of might or something else, which is what I generally see.  Hell, the "fluffier" Dark Elf lists I have faced have slapped it on to a wizard with the reverse ward save and stuffed it into trash units to keep them around, and they can make virtually their entire army stubborn if they want.  Even the everyone is unbreakable douchebag empire list (that no longer exists, btw) still occasionally took the crown on its own peg lord or character in a knight block.  One really good general not taking an item just means he decided something else was worth it or that he was good enough/nice enough to get by without it.

And yeah, just because all armies pay the same cost for something does not make it appropirately costed.  While I agree that the scroll is probably priced correctly, given its now one per army status and general inability to stop the 6 dice chuck it and f--- it, the BSB is absolutely a steal at 25 points, at least outside of undead armies.  Being able to reroll any LD test is amazing, when you consider the abundance of Steadfast and how an entire game can be lost on one random blown panic test.  If you think that ability is only worth 25 points, then I am curious to know if you think the equally ubiquitous fourth level on a wizard is worth the 35 points everyone pays for it.  Is one more spell and +1 to cast and dispell really more valuable than rerolling everything inside a two foot diameter bubble?

I wouldn't hold your feet to the fire on this, but calling Gutlord out of touch is the biggest act of projection I have seen on these boards in a while.  Some of us actually go to these competitive events and we are not going to believe armchair generals over our own personal experiences.

[rothgar13]

That's what I figured. And congrats on beating Leenus.

[Shadowlord]

Just as you know, bragging about your skills in a game for nerds online don't make you look cool.

All points are valid here on this forum, not just from those attend tournaments

[Nihmwit]

I guess some of our difference in opinions is just regional preferences.  I've mentioned before I play in the So Cal region, with frequent appearances on the west coast tournament scene, and I can honestly say I DO NOT see the crown that often.  From OK players?  Yes, I see it probably 70% of the time, typically when the person isn't running a tyrant.  I have NEVER seen the crown taken by a lizardman player, by a WoC player, or by an empire player (granted, that was old codex). 

[sitaavanu]

Nihmwit - i'm south east (raleigh NC) and I am in the same boat as you.

[Gutlord Inquisitor]

Not far from me at all... Did you go to the last grail quest or southern assault? I'm normally in Raleigh for brawler bash but I couldn't make it this year (one of our club mates managed to schedule his wedding that exact day  ). I was at brawler last year and the year before.

[sitaavanu]

I did not, last 2 years have been kinda rough on the money side so my tourneys have been limited to the local scene and GFs birthday overlapped with Brawler this year.  How far away are you? Perhaps we could find an inbetween store and hack out our differences

[Phazael]

That's what I figured. And congrats on beating Leenus.

It is not likely to happen again in the near future.  The guy is a machine and made a rare error in risk management that he will never repeat.  No bragging involved there, just a combination of the right amount of luck at the right time while running an army I knew very well.  Leenus's trophy case is a lot fuller than mine, and deservidly so.

Also for the others in this thread, my experience comes from events on both coasts and one in the central US.  I know Gutlord attends a fair amount of events, as well.  My point was that someone bashing a guys views derived from personal experience, when they have by their own admission not been in the competitive scene rescently, is off base.  At least as it pertains to competitive events.  Gutlord's experiences pretty much mirror my own and represent the southwest scene in the US, as well.  There is also an element of some players taking unusual choices, either to be different or because they know that most people tend to go with the obvious choices and you can win games against a lot of people by bringing the unexpected.  My version of this is taking Lore of Heavens instead of Shadow in a lot of my armies, but everyone who plays enough has their own personal tricks.

[Nihmwit]

Those rare, random moments against top tier players are often the best stories, amusing to both sides given their rarity and unlikelyness.  I was playing against one of the top players in my store, who was playing his high elves (for something different).  The destruction of a minor archer unit on his extreme left flank resulted in a huge unit of pheonix guard, complete with level 2 wizard and his tricked out BSB, to panic (box cars twice on the panic check).  The pheonix guard then ran, bouncing  through unit after unit of his army (two of which were horde units of archers), to run completely off the RIGHT side of the table, for a total run distance of 31 inches.  Two additional units paniced from the bouncing (they rallied next turn).  Both of us couldn't help but laugh at how ridiculous the situation had just become.

[Gutlord Inquisitor]

I did not, last 2 years have been kinda rough on the money side so my tourneys have been limited to the local scene and GFs birthday overlapped with Brawler this year.  How far away are you? Perhaps we could find an inbetween store and hack out our differences

Sadly not quite that close for a casual game. I'm in Norfolk, VA. But I'll be sure to keep you in mind if I ever have to head down that way in the near future. You have a pretty good tournament scene down there in NC (much better than VA!) so I do go down there from time to time for tournaments. I'm feeling frustrated since I missed Brawler and I don't think there's another tournament anywhere even vaguely close until the NOVA. I wish I could attend 6 GTs in a year!

To answer your previous points and get back on topic (i.e. someone is WRONG on the INTERNET  ), I was just speaking from my own experience and I will freely admit this is not as extensive as some other players and it is limited to tournaments within about 5 hours of me. Sounds like Phazael has a lot more recent experience than me! However, I've chatted to a few TOs about this subject.

With regard to Warriors of Chaos, I often see Chosenstar builds comped out, but even then I will typically see either a disc-riding sorcerer lord with the stubborn crown (very similar to the DE peglord) or the stubborn crown in a unit as insurance in case you don't get the 12 roll early enough. (Back ups for your back ups!)

Empire - regardless of how things were, I'll leave that alone, although the only thread I found on the empire forum on the stubborn crown seemed to say it was a good item - have a new book and now, unlike the old book, you can't buy stubborn/unbreakable out of your core allowance, nor can Priests use spells to make them Unbreakable. Empire have a huge number of Stubborn options in Special but core is pretty empty these days. I expect the crown to be pretty much mandatory, particularly since it makes detachments stubborn and there have to be some uses for that. Stubborn Crown on a foot captain with an enchanted shield costs 106 points and has a respectable 2+ save and makes a halberdier unit damn near unbreakable as long as he's alive.

Ultimately, the point of this thread was asking about Stubborn in general and those armies which don't need the stubborn crown only can get away without it because they have unbreakable or stubborn troops as a cheap and plentiful supply. Every army builds its backbone out of Stubborn troops as much as possible, ideally Stubborn units (e.g. Templeguard, Chosenstar), otherwise units with enough ranks as to be steadfast against just about anything and for everything else there's the stubborn crown. Adding the Stubborn crown to the game just meant everyone has access to this trick and indeed everyone does use it. And for those armies with access to stubborn/unbreakable troops, the crown of command is cheap enough to shore up any weak points. With Empire, I typically have a unit of halberdiers sandwiched between flagellants and greatswords and I need to make sure that they can hold the line, if a unit of the enemy punches through I am in trouble!

Claiming that the BSB and dispel scroll are undercosted I think shows how out of touch you are with what is an appropriate cost.  The game is fairly centric around these 2 options and gives us a good tool to gauge what the appropriate cost of upgrades/gear should be.

Well hang on.

• The BSB was worth 25 points in 7th/6th. Certainly people did take a BSB then, so it was worth the cost.
• 8th edition added a whole heap more Ld tests. Swift reforms, march blocking, frenzy tests, reforms in combat, etc.
• 8th edition made Ld more useful because combat is more often on base Ld due to steadfast in 8th whereas in 7th it was typically snake eyes due to combat res in 7th.
• Re-rolling most Ld tests in 7th was apparently worth 100 points. (Imperial Banner - although the 8th ed BSB rule is actually better than the Imperial Banner).

So 8th edition made re-rolling Ld tests MORE important than in 7th edition and added an ability worth more than 100 points in 7th (when Ld tests were less important), and you think it's still worth the same amount in 8th? Really?

Put another way, a good litmus test for any item being underpointed is the following question:

How many points would this item have to be before you wouldn't take it?

If BSB was +100 points (for everyone across the board), would you still take it? I reckon I would. I might think twice, especially in small games, but I think it'd be too useful to leave at home even at that cost.

[Wildcard]

As mentioned above, wildcard still doesn't use the crown of command with ogres.

Will i use it in other lists? Sure - in brets it helps against rubber lance syndrome and in my O&G it gives me a scar-vet like black Orc on boar to buy time with.

I'm not opposed to the item, and I know the value of stubborn.  After all the games I've had in 8th using ogres (both old book and new - more than 100 games, most of them in events), my own experience is that the crown is wasted points for ogres.

[grey templar]

True, it doesn't happen a whole lot, but I would rather spend the points and not need it then not spend the points and regret it later.

[Nihmwit]

100+ points for the BSB?  I wouldn't take it, especially if I had access to the crown of command 

Remember, the other aspect of the BSB is the ability to take one of the uber-standards (granted, some are less uber than others), and the cost of that ability has to be factored into the base price of the BSB.  So, we have the base price of the hero, plus the price of the bsb, plus any magic standard and/or magic items.

So, for goblins?  Sure, we're looking at MAYBE a 100+ points as things currently stand, say double it at your revised point cost.  For WoC or our own ogres?  I'm not going to pay more for 300+ points for that.  Given the low leadership of the ogres, how inherently deadly failing leadership can be, and now have such a huge point sink that is effectively mandatory for basic survival, then I would have written ogres off as an ineffective, inflexible, not-fun army to play and picked up someone a little more balanced. 

Failing leadership is extremely deadly in this game, and if they didn't offer you multiple avenues to at least mitigate the danger, then I think the game would devolve into somethign far more frustrating than fun.

And the only time I ever see steadfast come into play is with the more horde-like armies (the numbers, not the formation), like skaven, beastmen, or O&G.

[sitaavanu]

Sadly not quite that close for a casual game. I'm in Norfolk, VA.

I have a friend or two up your way I'll drop you a line next time that i'm going to visit them and see if you are free.

Ultimately, the point of this thread was asking about Stubborn in general and those armies which don't need the stubborn crown only can get away without it because they have unbreakable or stubborn troops as a cheap and plentiful supply. Every army builds its backbone out of Stubborn troops as much as possible, ideally Stubborn units (e.g. Templeguard, Chosenstar), otherwise units with enough ranks as to be steadfast against just about anything and for everything else there's the stubborn crown. Adding the Stubborn crown to the game just meant everyone has access to this trick and indeed everyone does use it. And for those armies with access to stubborn/unbreakable troops, the crown of command is cheap enough to shore up any weak points. With Empire, I typically have a unit of halberdiers sandwiched between flagellants and greatswords and I need to make sure that they can hold the line, if a unit of the enemy punches through I am in trouble!

Conversation got a bit derailed but basically this.
Stubborn is good no one will say otherwise.  Is it manditory to be successful? no. Does every army jump on it like a bsb or dispell scroll? to an extent. Can armies find builds and tricks that circumvent the need for stubborn? yes.

It's a good item, a core tactic to warhammer has always been the hammer and anvil approach.  I think that due to steadfast and a handful of other freatures in each army you don't need the crown to pull off this approach.  Additionally you can play armies that don't function on the hammer and anvil mentality.


on the whole bsb/dispel scroll thing.  This is my opinion, the designers of the game we're aware of how influential these items would be on the table.  I hated in 7th edition when I would loose combat by 1 and break ... it felt silly to me.  With how cheap the bsb is I know that loosing combat by 1 I probably won't break and if I do it was meant to be.  Thats an easier pill to swallow.  I assume they made it cheap enough that all armies could get this same level of comfort as it is equally impotant to 90% of the armies out there.

I don't look at it as an item, I look at it as an aspect of the game.  Kind of like terrain, it's there it has it's rules it has a pretty important impact on the game and I just have to work with or around it.  I don't look at the hill and go 'i'd pay 100pts for that hill and clearly that means it is too cheap.'

How many points would you pay to give a unit the step up rule in 7th?  I know I would have given up a Hero slot without thinking twice.

I accept the fact that one a game if i don't IF my opponent will simply say 'scroll' and my awesome spell will do nothing.

[D'rthock the Insatiable]

Just because you commonly see an item doesn't mean that it is undercosted.  Nor does it mean that it is super effective.

If an item is something that is bought as a no-brainer for just about every army, yes it probably means it could be more expensive. 

Don't have time to read or respond to more, but I'd just like to quickly note this argument is bunk. 

First, a real life example: bread is commonly bought and certainly could be more expensive (while still being bought but the masses) but that certainly doesn't mean it should be more expensive.  Warhammer items/units/etc should not be costed based on demand.  Rather, they should be costed based on balance. 

Now, an example in our game: if every unit in our book cost 50% more points, you would still see people taking certain units almost every time because they would be the best choice based on a cost/benefit analysis.  That does not mean that every unit/item is appropriately costed/balanced.

If you want to argue that the crown is undercosted then argue it's value compared to other items and the benefit that it has (I'm not taking a side because I don't have more time before my wife gets here to pick me up [and she's here now], but I would note that the fact that there is an argument on here leads me to think it might not be).  However, do not argue that because X number of people take it, then it must be under costed.

Also, sorry if this has been addressed since this post.  Again, my time is expired.

[Gutlord Inquisitor]

As mentioned above, wildcard still doesn't use the crown of command with ogres.

Wildcard is weird. 

100+ points for the BSB?  I wouldn't take it, especially if I had access to the crown of command 

I honestly think I would still buy a BSB at +100 points if that was the norm. Especially if it didn't add an extra 100 vps when lost. But the point there is that at +100 points you might not take a BSB, you'd perhaps want to save the points. That's what I was getting at. At +75 points? Would it be an auto-include then? How about at +50 points? How many points would it have to cost before you would think twice about taking it?

It is substantially below what people would pay for the item, because that's the price it has always been and the 100 extra vps (plus auto-death when fleeing) balance out the fact that it's massively cheaper than the value of the item. But every army can have only 1, it is (almost) equally useful to (almost) all armies, so it doesn't seem a big imbalance. And it isn't a big imbalance. Which (somewhere back in the mists of time at the beginning of all this) was my point - a very undercosted item or power or upgrade can be underpriced without necessarily being unfair.

I have a friend or two up your way I'll drop you a line next time that i'm going to visit them and see if you are free.

You're on.

Conversation got a bit derailed but basically this.
Stubborn is good no one will say otherwise.  Is it manditory to be successful? no. Does every army jump on it like a bsb or dispell scroll? to an extent. Can armies find builds and tricks that circumvent the need for stubborn? yes.

Okay I think I can agree with this to some degree.

on the whole bsb/dispel scroll thing.  This is my opinion, the designers of the game we're aware of how influential these items would be on the table. ... I don't look at it as an item, I look at it as an aspect of the game.  Kind of like terrain, it's there it has it's rules it has a pretty important impact on the game and I just have to work with or around it.  I don't look at the hill and go 'i'd pay 100pts for that hill and clearly that means it is too cheap.'

Ha, well, it's equally clear that the designers did NOT consider how influential some items would be. The prime examples are the Power Scroll that got almost universally banned and eventually errata'd, the Folding Fortress (that is still typically banned at tournaments) and last but not least, Slaughtermasters wearing armour.

Releasing Beastmen a little while before 8th edition with a Stubborn upgrade for 70 points and then putting the Crown of Command that does the same thing for 35 points indicates that one or both of these haven't been thought through properly.

Ultimately, my issue with the Crown of Command is precisely what you're saying - it's part of the game but it basically circumvents huge chunks of the game. Steadfast, ranks, any combat res beyond enough to beat your opponent is largely meaningless, it gives deathstars a safety net and undermines the tactical aspect of the game. It isn't so much "this item is underpointed" (although I feel it is) but damage done to the reward for outmaneuvering your opponent. Now this applies to Stubborn units of any kind, the Crown just gets my focus because it is the easiest way of making any given unit Stubborn.

D'rthock... you make some good points but they'll have to wait until later.

[sitaavanu]

In that same vein (if I'm following you correctly gutlord) I think that stubborn is a bit easy to throw around.

Part of the reason crown doesn't bother me is the existence of steadfast.  Without it there would be practically no way for Ogres to ever be stubborn against more hordy armies such as Empire.  Who in turn will almost always be stubborn against ogres.

If steadfast didn't exist I would be inclined to agree that the ability to give stubborn to any unit is kinda over the top, but as many units are naturally stubborn due to the # of models in the unit giving other types of units that same option is inline rather than over the top.

Ha, well, it's equally clear that the designers did NOT consider how influential some items would be. The prime examples are the Power Scroll that got almost universally banned and eventually errata'd,

Yet teclis who basically has unlimited power scrolls with no negative effect is not ... thus part of my generic hatred towards special characters. *grumble grumble*

[Phazael]

Ogres simply do not get to bennefit from the steadfast rule as much as conventional armies, even in the most ludicrous of deathstar scenarios.  Ogres rely on killing to generate combat resolution more than any other army, so one bad round of dice can torpedo you against block infantry or combination charges.  Or simply being debuffed for one turn.  The 35 point crown can change the outcome of that scenario into a minor inconvenience, instead of total disaster.

[rothgar13]

Agreed and incorporated, gents. My BSB is officially my Crown caddy now.

[Nihmwit]

The 35 point crown can change the outcome of that scenario into a minor inconvenience, instead of total disaster.

Very much agreed.  My point is that if one flub of the dice resulted in the annihilation of 40% of your army (figuring a good chunk of your cores, and probably two characters, one of whom was either your general or your BSB or your wizard, or some combination there of), dumping you into what is almost certainly an unrecoverable situation, the game would be significantly less fun.  That chance still exists, but it's also more rare.

[Gutlord Inquisitor]

Very much agreed.  My point is that if one flub of the dice resulted in the annihilation of 40% of your army (figuring a good chunk of your cores, and probably two characters, one of whom was either your general or your BSB or your wizard, or some combination there of), dumping you into what is almost certainly an unrecoverable situation, the game would be significantly less fun.  That chance still exists, but it's also more rare.

The game has two players. Is it fun for my opponent, having cleverly outmaneuvered my deathstar and inflicted enough wounds/static res for me to be looking at snake eyes, to have me just shrug and say "stubborn crown", point to a model that wasn't even eligible for him to attack and easily pass my test? Worse, easily reform, and clobber his flanking unit?

If it means that I can march units with no real concern for being outmaneuvered then the value of maneuver goes down. I think that makes the game less fun. Personally, I think the game would be a whole heap more tactical and more fun if the special rule was removed from the game altogether.