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.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Pfft. Overguessing exists because not every army can field HtH monsters. It's a legit and useful counterbalance that keeps Empire and other "squishy" armies playable.

Please explain how that works on the battlefield.

Cannon/cataput is on the same level as the enemy (i.e. not on a hill) so it can't see over units. Crew can see enemy unit A in front of them, and maybe a bit of motion an indeterminate distance behind unit A from enemy unit B. So they are going to shoot over the closer threat of A in the hope of hitting the unknown unit B, which they cannot see well enough to identify, much less target accurately (thus, out of LOS)?

But because the PLAYER can see that Unit A is just a wimpy screen in front of a more dangerous Unit B, the PLAYER can deliberately shoot high to hit B? How does the cannon crew come by this knowledge, that they can snipe a unit they can't even see? It's not like the have (in most cases) aerial observation, or radios to tell the cannon crew exactly where to shoot to violate the 'can't shoot at targets without LOS' rule.

In short, overguessing in WFB is manipluating the letter of the rules in clear violation of the intent.

I wish GW would put that into the rules, and end the cheap shots once and for all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RiTides wrote:That doesn't make sense as a way of looking at the rules either, ImparialTard, because what if the tiny little skinks are 6" away, and my scary temple guard with Slann are right behind? From a "does it makes sense" standpoint, of course you would ignore the skink (who are going to run away anyway) and shoot the temple guard / slann.

But when you're looking at rules, you can't always agree on a "what makes sense" interpretation... (people usually take the side that benefits them) so you have to go by what's written.

Or at least, somewhat! You can't make up rules about you measuring for your opponent, the shot disappearing, etc, etc. I'm taking this side of the argument, and I don't have any guess range weaponry! What I do have are salamanders, which have a rule that specifically states they can accidentally fire over a unit (they add an artillery dice roll to the flamer template) by the flames arcing over top of them. It makes sense that a stone-thrower could do the same thing... and since it's just a guess, there's no reason why you might not overguess by mistake. Would the shot then not count, either?

That just doesn't make any sense!

If the overguess was only a little, then sure.

But if the screen is close to the war machine (say, 6"), and the hard target well behind (say, 20"), and the PLAYER guesses 18"... that's a mistake well beyond any that would likely be made by a cannon crew on the battlefield. It's a clear attempt to violate the 'cannot shoot at a target out of LOS' rule.

Vulcan wrote:In short, overguessing in WFB is manipluating the letter of the rules in clear violation of the intent.

I understand what you are trying to say but I think you assume that intent of the rules is to foster realism in scale which I would say is pretty shaky. And even if that was the case, a person could argue back "well, this is an crew that has seen enough battle to be pretty sure that certain units are used to hide tougher ones so they just take a crack shot from the wisdom of experience." As such, the argument from realism isn't as rock solid as you feel, IMO.

So the end result is:

a) Play as if someone will take the cheap shot and guess WAY longer than their target could possibly be. Take this into account in your deployment and movement during the game.

AND

b) Don't take cheap, rules-abusing shots like this yourself. Treat the other player with respect, it might rub off.

I think John raises a good point about this possibly being a legitimate tactic. People aren't really addressing his point. Using words like "cheap" to describe a viewpoint that is different from your own without actually dealing with a valid argument (much less appealing to any rules or discussing their interpretation) is the opposite of respect. I can see that "be prepared for others to cheat but don't cheat yourself" is good advice for dignified behavior. But the question is whether this is cheating in the first place.

Vulcan wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Pfft. Overguessing exists because not every army can field HtH monsters. It's a legit and useful counterbalance that keeps Empire and other "squishy" armies playable.

Please explain how that works on the battlefield.

Cannon/cataput is on the same level as the enemy (i.e. not on a hill) so it can't see over units.

It's not like the have (in most cases) aerial observation, or radios to tell the cannon crew exactly where to shoot to violate the 'can't shoot at targets without LOS' rule.

In short, overguessing in WFB is manipluating the letter of the rules in clear violation of the intent.

I wish GW would put that into the rules, and end the cheap shots once and for all.

The fact that WFB specifies the obsolete and archaic "Guess" mechanic that is only limited by the maximum range of the weapon, as opposed to a far smarter and simpler "place and scatter" mechanic (as in BFG Armada and now 40k) is all the explanation that is necessary.

But if you're talking about a Warhammer *FANTASY* battlefield, it works via innate Magic that provides every army with 2 Power Dice and 2 Dispel Dice, while ensuring that units flee in the most advantageous direction at all times.

If you were talking about a pseudo-realistic battlefield, then you'd have to concede that the flattness of the tabletop is a very poor abstraction of RL terrain, and that even IRL, armies have spotters and signalmen and messengers and pigeons.

The real world bears no resemblance to the Warhammer world, and claiming any sort of intent like that is not supported anywhere in the ruleset. Indeed, the very fact that Empire, which has NO HtH monsters, but has multiple efficient Guess weapons that were not revised in the WFB7 Army Book, nor in the WFB7 Rulebook strongly implies that GW expects and endorses this tactic.

In short, if you want to play a realistic game, don't play WFB.

My advice to you is simple: learn to play better. Don't be the guy who places juicy targets in line with enemy Guess weapons, and then complain that the tactic is "cheap" because you don't have the Generalship skillz to counter them.

ImperialTard- this whole mess started due to the fact that the spell only does strength 1 hits which would not affect the giant due to its toughness, that's why my opponent and myself started talking about over guessing so the spell wouldn't be wasted.

I do think the problem is I tend to look at the games with a bit of realism as in my mind a catapult launches its missile up into the air in an arc rather than in a straight line. I can totally agree with banning over guessing to hit units behind hills and buildings etc that have not been seen by the firers, but when you think of the area covered by a giants base compared to the area covered by a typical units base surely you must be able to see something past it?

Mick

Mick A wrote:BAWTRM- last nights game was the straw that broke the camels back so to speak. My local club has been running a yearly WHFB league for 5 years now and I can't remember there being one game where there hasn't been a query/arguement over the rules or interpritation of them...

I've personally being playing WHFB since the first edition and have never seen so many questions raised as there have been with this and the last edition. If I do play again I think I'll go back to third edition if there are others at the club willing to do the same (I'm not the only one at the club giving up on this edition).

Mick

I can feel your pain in this regard Mick. I've only played since 5th Ed. but I can see where you're coming from. (personally I believe 6th Ed to be the best of the bunch I've played).

Our own gaming group was Looking into Armies of Arcana for a moment, but the guy who was really the pusher behind it died in an accident, so in the end we stuck with what we knew. It did look like a very interesting system though and I've read favorable reviews about it.

BAWTRM wrote:Our own gaming group was Looking into Armies of Arcana for a moment, but the guy who was really the pusher behind it died in an accident, so in the end we stuck with what we knew.

Whoa.

I'm going from memory here, so nobody shoot me down on this,

Overguessing.

Cannon follow a different mechanic from trebuchet, mortars, stonethrowers and scrap launchers, in that they must have LOS to their target. All the others only require lLOS to an enemy unit in the direction of the shot. So it is perfectly legitimate to lob a shell/rock over a unit of skirmishers at the hard core behind, and I believe there is an article on this on the GW website. If your spell follows the same rules as a stonethrower then you were perfectly entitled to cast your spell where you wanted.

Magic.

You mage shouldn't have been able to cast any spells at all. He is part of a unit locked in combat, as such he has to follow those rules (unless of course I've missed something glaringly obvious, and so would like to receive a page reference so I can correct my ways), so no spells, no leaving, no ranged weapons.

Cheers

Andrew

Actually the BRB does specifically mention two things
1) that you must declare a target in LOS that the stone thrower is trying to shoot at.
2) you must make a guess of the range as accurately as possible

so that means that purposefully overguessing is in fact cheating, not only in a moral sense but also because it is against the rules. It is hard to regulate, but that does not change the rules.

You are taking the bit about 'you must guess the range as accurately as possible' out of context. All it is is re-iterating that you can't pre-measure so have to depend on your guessing to get the result you want.

True that is probably the way to read it, but in my group i guess maybe we use that as an excuse as to no over guessing.

We say that since you must try to guess as accurately as possible, without measuring ranges, then you need to at least try and hit the target your aiming at, similar to the charging units at the other side of the board rule. The phrase is probably merely trying to strengthen their point about no measuring ranges, but since it is in the rules you have to do it.

I dont know if it's sloppy writing on behalf of GW but I think there is a diiference in the rules.

Cannon specifies LOS to target, thrower specifies LOS to an enemy unit in the direction of fire. Not that you have to have LOS to your target. (Please see previous caveat)

Andrew

skyth wrote:You are taking the bit about 'you must guess the range as accurately as possible' out of context. All it is is re-iterating that you can't pre-measure so have to depend on your guessing to get the result you want.

I haven't played WHFB in several years, but do they still require you to guess on the charge range?

If some asshat guesses it's 22 inches to a Giant that is actually 6 inches away, he better be calling charges from the first turn and failing them all game. If they think 6 inches is halfway across the table, they need to play like that the entire game.

If screening target (A) is 6" away and Juicy Unit (B) is 8" away, guessing 8" for (A) seems plausible, even if you are doing it to hit (B) while calling (A) your target.

If screening target (A) is 6" away and Juicy Unit (B) is 22" away, guessing 22" for (A) seems like cheese/cheating/abusing the rules and no one should play with you, or they should beat you in the parking lot with your miniatures case.

Mick A wrote:ImperialTard- this whole mess started due to the fact that the spell only does strength 1 hits which would not affect the giant due to its toughness, that's why my opponent and myself started talking about over guessing so the spell wouldn't be wasted.

I do think the problem is I tend to look at the games with a bit of realism as in my mind a catapult launches its missile up into the air in an arc rather than in a straight line. I can totally agree with banning over guessing to hit units behind hills and buildings etc that have not been seen by the firers, but when you think of the area covered by a giants base compared to the area covered by a typical units base surely you must be able to see something past it?

Mick

I admit, Mick, I didn't consider that. That's more than enough reason for me that if you and I were playing, I'd totally let you overguess.

Has anyone in this discussion mentioned "True Line-of-Sight" yet? 'Cause if you apply that rule which allows you to shoot at visible bases behind tiny hill edges and such, maybe you could apply it to shooting at enemies straddling between a giant's legs?

skyth wrote:You are taking the bit about 'you must guess the range as accurately as possible' out of context. All it is is re-iterating that you can't pre-measure so have to depend on your guessing to get the result you want.

Hunh? What part of:

tiekwando wrote: you must make a guess of the range as accurately as possible

is unclear?

You can see unit A. You must guess the range to unit A as asccurately as possible.

If you overguess a little and hit a unit I have close behind A, okay. That happesn.

If you overguess by three times the actual range, that's not 'overguessing,' that's a clear attempt to miss Unit A and hit something else. Which is in clear violation of 'guessing the range as accurately as possible,' and therefore at the very least poor sportsmanship, and at worst outright cheating.

It is the part that is taken out of context. If you actually read the rule in the book, not just the part that he quoted, it is simply re-interating that you can't pre-measure.

"Then declare how far the rock is to be fired - this can be any number of inches between a minimum of 12" and the maximum range of the stone thrower (normally 60"). Do this without measuring the distance to that target, so try to guess the range as accurately as possible. Once you have made your guess..." BRB 92

So the in the context of the sentance it would seem RAI that the designers were saying "guess well to hopefully get a hit" but RAW "so try to guess as accurately as possible" gives a new rule, even though it is the second part of the sentence. Still though my guess is that RAI the designers didn't want people to throw stones over screens anyways but like i said, its just a guess (with much personal bias influencing it).

RAW requires you to take the entire sentence into context, not just a part of it.

I believe that there really is two ways to interpret the sentance. One way to look at it as

Do this without measuring the distance to that target thus you must guess and it is advantageous to try to guess accurately as possible. (a suggestion)

Or

1)Do this without measuring the distance to that target
2)so try to guess the range as accurately as possible (a command)

that is the lovely thing about english there is so much ambiguity, is it a compound sentence (i think thats the right term) or is it just an explanatory clause? How you answer that question asnwers what you think about the rule.

Having had a chance to look at the rules, I'm horribly wrong about my earlier post. I guess I was thinking about last edition.

The rule is pretty clear, you declare a target visible to the stonethrower and guess the range to it. Now I would have no problem with an over estimation to land the rock in the middle of the unit, eg 1 or 2", but I would if it was by 5 or 6".

Cheers

Andrew

Hmmm... looking at the rules and the arguements in this thread it seems perfectly fine to overguess to try and hit a unit... theirs a single keyword in their... "guess" the stone thrower can either A) See a unit in LoS and guess how far away it is (range) to try and hit it.... B) Take a "GUESS" that there might just be another unit behind the visable unit and purposly shoot over...

Thats just one way to see it for those who want this to be "realistic"

To quote a wise tournament organizer:

"There's two ways to interpret that rule. One of them is going to get your ass kicked. Do as you will."


I'm going to step aside from the rule debate about overguessing being cheating to touch on something someone else said about those armies that can overguess NEEDING to in order to beat cc monsters.

Are you KIDDING me?

Chaos warriors charge empire spearmen. Not only are the chaos warriors going to statistically LOSE or just barely squeak by a win because the enemy is likely getting saves and outnumbering them and has more ranks, but before the combat starts they get shot by the handgunner attachments, and a unit of halberdiers comes in from the side that counts as charging, cancelling their ranks, probably killing one with their S4 attacks, and will most likely get a flanking bonus after all is said and done.

That hodgepodge of crappy hth guys just totally kicked the crap out of those chaos warrior elite cc uber dudes with a couple special rules. The chaos army [full of awesome cc dudes] has pretty much no shooting other than risky magic [which can be countered by cheaper empire wizards] with which to disrupt this line and shoot the detachments before the warriors get into cc. Then we have the steam tank which crunches chaos warriors pretty handily, and any jackass can take van horstman's speculum and pummel a chaos lord into oblivion, or take a runefang and just charge, utterly obliterating those chaos characters that don't have a ward save [that's all of them, unless they got the warshrine buff].

Empire has PLENTY of good cc answers without having to overguess and find loopholes in the rules, legal or otherwise.

Chaos Warriors aren't the issue, and you know it. If you go up, my example was a Bloodthirster.

The Arch Lector that I typically run will beat a normal BT (Obs armor, firestorm blade, always hate) in combat

GW has gone back and forth on this issue a few times.

In the past there have been Warhammer Chronicles articles which explicitly allowed sniping and overguessing, and in the past, the rules for Stone Throwers specifically noted that you just had to have LOS to enemy in the line of fire, but you were explicitly allowed to overguess to hit stuff behind them. The rationale being that catapults are designed, in part, to get at targets behind something else (be it a wall or a screening unit).

That said, the present edition specifically requires you to guess, as accurately as possible, to hit a target you have LOS to. This means that overguessing to hit something else is a violation of the 7th edition rules. Yes, it is hard to police. This is a flaw of the WH rules. But it's not exactly hard to tell, once you've played a turn or two with the person. An inch or three off- plausible. A foot off? Guess again, please.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Chaos Warriors aren't the issue, and you know it. If you go up, my example was a Bloodthirster.

They can shoot that bloodthirster with like 100 handgun shots if they so chose.

A bloodthirster charging chaos warriors wins by MORE. The empire guys automatically do effectively 5 wounds to the bloodthirster, and an extra one if he happens to only do 5. Chaos warriors generally do 3, and actually only 2 by the end of it because they may not be outnumbering him anymore.

The gribbly crappy guys hold up better to a close combat monster, for fewer points, than elite guys. HUH! And on the way in, you can shoot at him with 20 handgunner shots. Wow, that sounds awesome!

There's no unit that goes toe to toe with a bloodthirster well by actually fighting it. Stubborn units, unbreakable units, units with lots of combat res are able to sit there and take it, but that's all. Certain characters can stand up to a bloodthirster - none of those characters are in the WoC book. Dozens are in the empire book [any jerk with a speculum, almost any build]. Others are in the dwarf book. Also dark elf book, high elf book, even chaos dwarves.

My point? NO, in NO WAY, EVER, do you need to CHEAT or find loopholes in order to deal with those monsters. Other army books have WORSE of a time of it than empire does. Far, far worse.

If they want to fix it, they have a shot (har har) to do so next year, or so the rumors/leaks say.

Well, here's a funny one for ya...

I'm supposed to guess as accurately as I can to hit my target with any guess weapon right? So I take my cannon and I happen to know that the enemy unit is 24" away. (First turn, both on the line or something else like that) What do I have to guess legally? 24" for the frong of the unit, 26" for the centre of mass...
Oh, and would it be wrong of me to guess 20" or 18" like I really would b/c the cannonball will bounce?

Same thing with firing a stone thrower at the middle of the enemy line. You have to declare a target, so you say the skaven slaves in the centre, but really you want to be in the centre of mass of the slaves & clanrats & giant rats & what not, so you aim for the rear right slave and try to guess bang on him and hope that wherever it lands, it hits something.

So RaI both those are fine yet interpreting as accurate as possible RaW would say no. ... go GW

B/c there is no way to adjuticate guessing, GW relies on fair play and spirit to get them through this; which means, overguessing is RaW legal ('cause you can't prove otherwise) and RaI bad sportsmanship. I like the 40k solution of place and scatter, less scatter with LoS. The Poison wind mortars are kinda neat.

I believe that complaining that having a shooty army means you should be able to have the handicap of being TFG is bull. Build a better army, one that uses the entire rule book, not just relying on shooting everything to death. Combat res is an amazing thing.

Mick A wrote:ImperialTard- this whole mess started due to the fact that the spell only does strength 1 hits which would not affect the giant due to its toughness, that's why my opponent and myself started talking about over guessing so the spell wouldn't be wasted.
Mick

But if you did go for "B" from my silly little list, do you think the wizard really measures his spells by strength, hits or other abstractions? Maybe he shouldn't know that the spell will have no effect on the giant until he's tried it at least once.

*snicker*