Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hello all, sorry if I seem a bit unwordly but I am new here as you can see. With regards to steadfast and multiple combats it is the units on both sides with the highest rank that count towards steadfast correct?

For instance unit A has 3 ranks B has 2 ranks, C has 5 ranks and D has 7 ranks.

If A is fighting C and B charges C in the flank, does C count as steadfast as it has 5 ranks to the maximum of 3 from A? or is steadfast cancelled as A and B together equal 5 ranks?

If A and D are both fighting C and C wins the combat, does A count as steadfast because D has it or do they both test separately from the overall combat res?

The rules seem to favor that ranks are not combined when determining steadfast, this seems to be a bit against the lore of it though. Steadfast is supposed to happen because the troops gain confidence from outnumbering the enemy. Would it not be more appropriate then to have the total number of ranks determining steadfast rather then the unit with the most (surely troops are more worried when 2 units of 3 ranks are attacking them than just one).

Steadfast does seem a bit too powerful with all the deathstar units that are seen (been lurking the forums a bit before I joined). I think flank and rear charges should gain bonuses to breaking steadfast. Battles around the world have swung because numerically superior units have been charged in flanks or rears. This often occurs because of the suprise factor and also because it appears their enemies are more numerous than they actually are.

Perhaps charging bonuses from flank and rear charges should count to negate ranks. Therefore a unit charged in the flank counts as having 1 less rank and the rear two less ranks (for that round only) to represent the demoralising nature of flank and rear charges. I also think disrupted units should lose ranks equal to the amount of disruption (thus a unit with 7 ranks charged in the flank by a disrupting unit will count as having 3 ranks, losing 1 from the flank charge and 3 from disruption).

These changes will allow deathstars and massive tarpit units to be broken by careful tactical positioning and synchronised charges, just like in real life. It would also enable tarpit units to retain their original function of locking up elite units, as long as you protect their sides and rear! This would add more dimension to the game and improve tactical cunning over mindlessly trying to grind them down. 8th is a great edition I think and with this tweak could be made better still.

Thoughts?

Compare the losing unit or units to the winning unit with the most ranks. Only those losing units with more ranks than the winning unit with the most ranks are steadfast. The other losing units take their break teats with the negative modifiers.

Example of multiple combat:
(w- winner L= loser)

w1 has 5 ranks
w2 has 2 ranks
L1 has 6 ranks
L2 has 3 ranks

Only L1 would be steadfast as it has more ranks than w1. L2 would not be steadfast as it has less ranks than W1.

You do not add the ranks of the winning units together.


As far as modifiers to steadfast ranks for flank and rear charges this has been discussed in the past in other threads. We may see a change in 9th edition. Remember, however, that steadfast does not mean unbreakable and that any steadfast unit could still fail it's test (though rare with good leadership and a BSB nearby). There is no way to quantify steadfast in real world terms. It is an abstraction designed to help deep formations hold out better.

You may want to look up the battle between Sparta and Thebes at Leuctra for more on how deep formations of troops about 50 ranks deep (Thebes) defeated Sparta's smaller sized, about 8 to 12 ranks deep, elite formations.

Just read it, nice battle that really shows the worth of superior numbers nice to see the other points have been discussed already here's hoping. They could even make it an errata for 8th without much difficulty really.

Here is an older thread discussing steadfast and flank and rear attacks:

Older Steadfast Thread