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.

Karon wrote:But even if you outplay your opponent, rolling that 1, when all you need is a 2, and you lose because of it, is terrible.

Variable Charge Distance takes out some tactics involved in the game.

Even if I'm 100 times more skillful than my opponent, that doesn't make me roll 1 more.

Here's the thing, I just got back from a game and let me tell you, there's enough randomization to screw you over already. I swear I rolled no less than 1/3rd 1s against the guy. His static resolution kept screwing me over. Result was a rather annoying loss.

Surtur wrote:

Karon wrote:But even if you outplay your opponent, rolling that 1, when all you need is a 2, and you lose because of it, is terrible.

Variable Charge Distance takes out some tactics involved in the game.

Even if I'm 100 times more skillful than my opponent, that doesn't make me roll 1 more.

Here's the thing, I just got back from a game and let me tell you, there's enough randomization to screw you over already. I swear I rolled no less than 1/3rd 1s against the guy. His static resolution kept screwing me over. Result was a rather annoying loss.

You played a game using 8th edition rumors?

It provides evidential support for the OMG ITS BORKEN!!11! brigade if they play with an incomplete rumour set and non-FAQd army books.

Otherwise, they couldn't back up their claims on the interwebz.

Makes sense?

I'm confused at people saying 1's are autofails...no, it never has been confirmed.

My example specifically said I was charging with my M5 Gors into a unit of swordsmen 7" away. So if I rolled a 1, it would fail.

Karon wrote:I suppose I am overreacting without taking the full impact that Init. Order will have.

Yeah, I suppose charging really won't MATTER anymore, which is really dumb, and makes no sense.

Chargers strike first is one of the reasons I moved over from 40k to fantasy.

Yay for homenization of 40k and Fantasy.....

This is pure gold Karon.

I'm building my lizardmen after shelving my HEs until the new rules come out.
Initiative strikes first makes Lizardmen almost invariably strike last.
The only reason to move forward is that I don't have any massed long ranged firepower.

Interestingly, I wonder if straight Init. order for H2H will make Great Weapons a much better option for low Init. armies. ie, If I'm gonna strike last, at least it'll be at +2 Str!

I am really chomping at the bit for a preview of these rules though. Must... have... more... information....

Karon wrote:I'm confused at people saying 1's are autofails...no, it never has been confirmed.

My example specifically said I was charging with my M5 Gors into a unit of swordsmen 7" away. So if I rolled a 1, it would fail.

Because if any of us make that claim we can easily be told "Over reacting it's not even in the rules you'll whine about everything!~" That, or a miscommunication / poor reading comprehension. The "What if a 1 is always a failure" has just been speculation from a few users because it's akin to WotR's charges (with banners having a similar effect).

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:I'm building my lizardmen after shelving my HEs until the new rules come out.
Initiative strikes first makes Lizardmen almost invariably strike last.

GW: You're relying too heavily on Saurus. Perhaps you should take more Skinks in your army in rank and file, in the new rules you can pile them back eight deep for a static +7 from ranks!

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:The only reason to move forward is that I don't have any massed long ranged firepower.

It's going to be this way for a lot of armies. You can do what I'll probably have to do (drop a huge unit something like 10x5), but the problem here is that it changes WHFB away from Hero Hammer into Deathstar-hammer. This edition I would never field a block of 60 Boyz with Gorbad and a big boss. Next edition, that unit might be a static 7 Stubborn Immune to Panic unit at Leadership 10 with a BSB and fighting in three ranks of two-attack fury.

Scottywan82 wrote:Interestingly, I wonder if straight Init. order for H2H will make Great Weapons a much better option for low Init. armies. ie, If I'm gonna strike last, at least it'll be at +2 Str!

Very unlikely, solely because you're only fighting in one rank now and - even with the reduction in armor save penalties - we're still looking at somewhere between a 16% and 33% drop in durability, in addition to having only six attacks with a six-wide front instead of 12 / 18 / 24 (HW&S / Spear / 2HW [assuming full attacks, 18 otherwise]). You may have a 33% higher wound ratio, but you also are sacrificing between 200, 300, and 400% attacks.

One thing that I think the "Random Charge Bonuses Suck!" crowd is forgeting is that, under these rumours, Banners allow you to re-roll the charge dice. This means, if you are 5.5" away, with M4, and you roll a 1, you canb re-roll it, giving you a 1/36 chance of failing.

Also, Musicians add +1" Charge distance, so a M4 unit now has about a 75% chance of charging further than they could in 7th edition.

Then of Course theres Dwarves...

I could understand some units getting +d6 to their charge but I don't like it. It just seems unnecessary. About the being able to KB your unit str and lower I'm not to worried, case in point Stegadons unit str 10.

FlammingGaunt wrote:I could understand some units getting +d6 to their charge but I don't like it. It just seems unnecessary. About the being able to KB your unit str and lower I'm not to worried, case in point Stegadons unit str 10.

The rumor is unit size, not strength. So ogre size models can KB other ogre size models and smaller. Cavarly, cav size and smaller ect.

Scottywan82 wrote:

Surtur wrote:

Karon wrote:But even if you outplay your opponent, rolling that 1, when all you need is a 2, and you lose because of it, is terrible.

Variable Charge Distance takes out some tactics involved in the game.

Even if I'm 100 times more skillful than my opponent, that doesn't make me roll 1 more.

Here's the thing, I just got back from a game and let me tell you, there's enough randomization to screw you over already. I swear I rolled no less than 1/3rd 1s against the guy. His static resolution kept screwing me over. Result was a rather annoying loss.

You played a game using 8th edition rumors?

Nope, just 7th. As is there is plenty of randomization that can steal a win from you.

On the subject of lizardmen always going last.. Uh we already do? Saurus move 4" thus they rarely get the charge off vs faster enemies.. therefore we strike last every round

SOMETIMES I'll get the charge with them (generally a counter charge).. If you charge a flank Im not too worried about going last anyway since the troops wont be that dangerous

Also going last isnt a big deal because you remove models from the REAR rank and Im going to get 50% more attacks now (If its true you only get 1 attack for the second rank fighting). A lot of these "issues" seem to come from the false belief that you'll be playing the SAME game in the SAME way.. Yes these rules do suck if you simply put them ontop of 7th edition.. but you wont be. As with EVERY new rule set your BEST way to adapt is to totally forget and throw out the old rules and read the new ones 10x over

Dont be "that" guy who still thinks his assault cannon is heavy 3 :(

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:

Karon wrote:I suppose I am overreacting without taking the full impact that Init. Order will have.

Yeah, I suppose charging really won't MATTER anymore, which is really dumb, and makes no sense.

Chargers strike first is one of the reasons I moved over from 40k to fantasy.

Yay for homenization of 40k and Fantasy.....

This is pure gold Karon.

I'm building my lizardmen after shelving my HEs until the new rules come out.
Initiative strikes first makes Lizardmen almost invariably strike last.
The only reason to move forward is that I don't have any massed long ranged firepower.

Kind of funny, isn't it?

You'll basically lose nothing by just deploying your guys, and just wait for your opponent to come charge you if you really wanted to, lol.

Karon wrote:

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:

Karon wrote:I suppose I am overreacting without taking the full impact that Init. Order will have.

Yeah, I suppose charging really won't MATTER anymore, which is really dumb, and makes no sense.

Chargers strike first is one of the reasons I moved over from 40k to fantasy.

Yay for homenization of 40k and Fantasy.....

This is pure gold Karon.

I'm building my lizardmen after shelving my HEs until the new rules come out.
Initiative strikes first makes Lizardmen almost invariably strike last.
The only reason to move forward is that I don't have any massed long ranged firepower.

Kind of funny, isn't it?

You'll basically lose nothing by just deploying your guys, and just wait for your opponent to come charge you if you really wanted to, lol.

Unless you need to capture an objective, something that will apparently be part of the new missions.

Yeah thats what people thought about 40k and gunlines as well.. but when GW added mandatory missions with objectives that changed quite fast

Its amazing what missions can do to peoples tactics.. You'll see who the "good" players are when they have to think about destroying the enemy AND making sure to capture stuff by end of game

Heh, forget about that part.

It will work out, though I think fantasy is going to be a good bit more boring, and less tactical now that charging gives basically no advantage.

It's because sometimes the troops are tired.
Sometimes they are running up hill.
Sometimes they are scared.
Sometimes they don't like being in the desert.
Sometimes they don't like being in the snow.
Sometimes they don't understand the general's orders.

There are a ton of variables the game takes into account. Of course, since it's a computer game, the computer can look at all those variables instantly and pop out a speed without the player even thinking about it. A good charge bonus system could reflect that in a table-top game, but it remains to be seen how well GW's system will work.

The point is, more or less randomness does not make a game more or less tactical. It just changes the skill involved in making tactical decisions

OK have played Shogun so very similar.
You can mitigate some of those variables by good tactics. You know full well in advance that if you force march troops across the battlefield they will get tired for example. You can make plans for that. You don't make a charge with fresh troops who decide they can't be arsed half way through the charge.
Because it is in real time and the variables computed means there is no comparison with WH.

D6 charges may not be more or less tactical. In which case there is no need for it, since it adds nothing to the game.
There is no skill involved in rolling a dice. Newton's laws greatly assist in the matter. You can make all the brilliant tactical moves you want, just for the god of dice to pee on your strawberries.

In what sense does a greater element of chance translate as tactical acumen?
You cannot mitigate the roll of a dice.
This concept that randomness means greater tactical decision making in WHFB is spurious .

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:D6 charges may not be more or less tactical. In which case there is no need for it, since it adds nothing to the game.

There's no need for most of the rules in most miniature games. You could probably abstract the whole thing down to a couple of dice rolls each turn. That wouldn't make it fun though.

There is no skill involved in rolling a dice. ... ( )
In what sense does a greater element of chance translate as tactical acumen?
You cannot mitigate the roll of a dice.

Sure you can. You can hold back from charging until you are sure you are in range. The die roll has been mitigated.

The skill is in making a decision about how to manage the risk of the roll not coming out the way you want it to. That's definitely a skill.

This concept that randomness means greater tactical decision making in WHFB is spurious .

I never said it means greater- that was someone else. I said it means different tactical decision making.

There's no need for most of the rules in most miniature games. You could probably abstract the whole thing down to a couple of dice rolls each turn. That wouldn't make it fun though.

This is immaterial. You or someone else said that the dice roll charge will neither add to nor detract from the tactical element of the game. If that is so why add it. If you said in your opinion it will improve the tactical game, then that is a matter of opinion with which one may agree or not.
Personally I still find the concept clunky, and seems to have been added to solve other issues that the rule changes have thrown up.

Sure you can. You can hold back from charging until you are sure you are in range. The die roll has been mitigated.

But I was under the distinct impression that you can wait until you are in range, roll and fail. That is what is getting people concerned. The tactical element has been mitigated but not the dice roll. I apologise if I have misunderstood something here.

The skill is in making a decision about how to manage the risk of the roll not coming out the way you want it to. That's definitely a skill.

That is true imho. But wether this will improve the game is questionable. Would be interested to see if anyone has play tested this yet.
IMHO the risk of a failed charge from 2-3 " definitely should be zero. I can see that a charge over a longer distance has more risk involved, though what am not sure.
maybe the re-enanctment afficianodos could provide some info here please?

I never said it means greater- that was someone else. I said it means different tactical decision making.

That would depend on the interpretation of the previous points raised. Am not convinced the risk assessment is quite the same as tactical skill, an aspect of it but not the same.
Apologies for mistaking your comments with someone else's.

NOBODY is going to fail a charge from 2 inches away. Nobody! If the rumor is to be believed, it will be basic Movement plus the dice, not just the dice. I'm not saying that is great; I'm saying people need to stop being so fatalistic about it, weeping and gnashing your teeth because you fear you will fail a charge that is 2 inches away. It's not gonna happen.

If you want to argue about it, at least argue about in terms that will actually be reasonable and practical within the game itself. Using impossibilities does very little to prove your point. Add on top of that, that using impossibilities to argue something that has not been verified and contextualized is silly at best.

Dwarves are gonna be able to triple their charge range 1/6 of the time! Man I'm stoked!!!!!!! Who knew Dwarves would be the new super power!

There's a lot of aggression locked up in those little bodies.

Rated
As I said - I may have misunderstood something
there is no gnashing , no wailing.

a simple explaination would have sufficed.

Sorry but I have no idea, what are these impossibilities you refer to?

The impossibilities I am referring to are failing these minuscule charges, i.e. 2 inches away. It puts things in a different perspective when you have to talk about failing charges 6 inches away. Still not great, I gladly admit, but very different.

The rumors on the first page give us the "best" info on what the charge conditions will be. Thanks to Grimstonefire for staying on top of it, even if I hope some of them are wrong.

Thanks for clarifying, much appreciated Rated.

Hulksmash wrote:Dwarves are gonna be able to triple their charge range 1/6 of the time! Man I'm stoked!!!!!!! Who knew Dwarves would be the new super power!

My dwarves might charge into melee for once like they do in the fluff! Madness!

Hulksmash wrote:Dwarves are gonna be able to triple their charge range 1/6 of the time! Man I'm stoked!!!!!!! Who knew Dwarves would be the new super power!

Has this been confirmed? Beacuse that would be a nasty little charge.

Why are people insisting that variable charge is less tactical?

Variable charge is a game mechanic, nothing more or less. In 7th ed, a unit with move 4" could charge 8", in 8th ed (assuming the rumours are correct), a unit with move 4" will now charge between 5" and 10".

The tactical decision in both cases is where to position yourself to try and get the charge and when to risk charging. The only thing that has changed is the game mechanic - in 7th you had to try and judge distance by eye to inform your decision. In 8th you will have to both judge by eye and consider the probability of a charge succeeding at different ranges.

Yes, there is more to think about, but ultimately the tactical decision is the same one as before - where can I move such that my chances of getting the charge are increased whilst my opponents chances of charging me decrease? Its not any more tactical or any less tactical, its just slightly different.

Hulksmash wrote:Dwarves are gonna be able to triple their charge range 1/6 of the time! Man I'm stoked!!!!!!! Who knew Dwarves would be the new super power!

"I'm wasted on cross country. We dwarves are natural sprinters. Very dangerous over short distances." Gimli - The Two Towers

Flashman wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:Dwarves are gonna be able to triple their charge range 1/6 of the time! Man I'm stoked!!!!!!! Who knew Dwarves would be the new super power!

"I'm wasted on cross country. We dwarves are natural sprinters. Very dangerous over short distances." Gimli - The Two Towers

Wow! You win for timely quote!

Alvin
I misunderstood what was meant
still not entirely convinced it is a good thing but is simply a personal opinion.
it has been well discussed so maybe time to let it give way to other rumours for a while.

Dwarves may not be thrown into close combat btw