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.

 Zygrot24 wrote:
I was going to compare it to FNP in 40k, but yes.

Also where is the confusion in charging? If you're in B2B (TOUCHING) you can't move. If you aren't, you can, and therefore you've charged.

If there is every any confusion about what is in B2B and what isn't, your opponent is a troll.

I completely forgot about Feel No Pain >_< (and I play plague marines )

All those oher games you mention are implementing minimal charge range or something like "if you are closer than this, you are in melee". I think the reasoning is the combination of the grace distance and to provide players and judges a clear picture of the battle. If you are supervising multiple matches there is a need to be able to tell what models are in melee with what models whitout the need of asking the players where they used the grace distance rule and where they didn't.

Warhammer Fantasy uses a similar rule. Two units may never get closer to eachother than one inch, except if they are in melee.

I think Brushfire would also benefit from this. Not because of trolls, but the game is played in uneven surfaces and round bases. "Touching" is more like a recommendation than an actual rule.

Especially with this squad system. There should be a clear declaration by position and distance between models about what models are in squad with whet other models. 15 models in b2b with eachother can mean one squad or even 15.

And the thing about First Aid is I do not think that a lot of people would distribute damage like the First Aid rule implies. If your squad is hit by 7 gunshots, you going to say something like: "One dies from two gunshots, so 3 dies, and one's armor goes down two. I roll 3 d10 for first aid." No?

Also at this point, thre is no rule about where to distribute that 2 points that reduces an armor value. It is clearly benefical to put it on a model that is most likely will not get attacked in the upcomig charge and melee phase.

The reason why I mentioned other games is to show you that there are other ways to play it. Brushfire's melee range is base to base contact. If I'm not within base to base I may charge. I can only charge up to 3 inches to reach base to base. If parts of the models pervent me from easily doing that, then I have grace distance to rely on and that is the ONLY time grace distance comes into play.

 WhiteRoo wrote:
...

I think Brushfire would also benefit from this. Not because of trolls, but the game is played in uneven surfaces and round bases. "Touching" is more like a recommendation than an actual rule.

...
And the thing about First Aid is I do not think that a lot of people would distribute damage like the First Aid rule implies. If your squad is hit by 7 gunshots, you going to say something like: "One dies from two gunshots, so 3 dies, and one's armor goes down two. I roll 3 d10 for first aid." No?

Also at this point, thre is no rule about where to distribute that 2 points that reduces an armor value. It is clearly benefical to put it on a model that is most likely will not get attacked in the upcomig charge and melee phase.

You seem a bit too hung up on grace distance, which I honestly had not even realized existed until now. I don't know how much you've gamed in/out of Brushfire, but I don't think I've ever had a game of any system where my opponent and I didn't know what was in B2B and what wasn't, unless he/she was TFG and trying to troll out a win. Grace distance just seems to be OTLG's mechanic for dealing with "wobbly model syndrome." And as for the squad issues you bring up; YES. That's kind of the point with the flexible activation and squadding rules of Brushfire.

And as for First Aid, AGAIN; First Aid says nothing and makes no impact on distribution. If I'm understanding your example correctly, which was a bit tough, there is no issue there. I would be rolling first aid as the models die before moving on to the next, but that's because rolling 3 at once and then deciding which models your successes apply to could be seen as a bit cheaty. And no, doing them as you distribute damage does not impact or disrupt the game enough to matter. And yes, wound distribution can be taken advantage of. That's okay. It's the sort of meta-game decision that is acceptable and part of any healthy rule system.

Whiteroo, all this niggling about really VERY basic mechanics isn't healthy feedback. B2B is so clearly defined in the gaming world that it hardly needs a better definition than itself. It's a concept so well understood and accepted picking it apart is not constructive Brushfire feedback, it's railing against the basics of miniature wargaming. A Sisyphean task.

Then is it legit to do this?

(I assume that Charging is part of the melee phase now. I also don't want to involve the grace distance in this example)

There is two Weasel Fusiliers b2b on the enemy side and I'm charging them with my single Hamster Berserker. These are gunners and have been activated for the example's shake.

I charge with my Hamster and place it carefully so that is only in btb with one of the weasels. No matter how carefully my opponent placed those weasels, I'm likely to be able to do this. Even if the distance with the other weasel's base is just one millimeter (that's like the thickness a common A4 folded 8 times). Now, because of my charge bonus I have a high chance to slain the first weasel and trigger Northern Berserker on the Hamster, not only getting a second set of attack but also a second charge gaining the charge bonus for the second attack set as well, because I made a point not to go B2B with the second weasel.



I'm not saying that the b2b melee range is bad, I'm saying it is not strict enough. These are cheating opportunities as well just opportunities to forget things because two activations later who is going to remember if between that two models the grace rule was used or not.

Escaping Combat is also based on b2b, and if a model starts it's turn in b2b with enemy models, a lot of limitations will get involved. But there is not even grace distance involved in this case.

For example, if a game gets interrupted by any reason for an hour or so, without having rules like "minimum distance a model have to keep form enemy models to be not in close combat range", or "squads have to keep distances from other squads" it will be outright impossible to pick up the game where the players left.

Of course one inch is still relative, but it makes the difference of "having a noticeable distance between the models" and "the models are as close to eachother as possible".

Also, no weird tricks with "I'm not touching you".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zygrot24 wrote:


Whiteroo, all this niggling about really VERY basic mechanics isn't healthy feedback. B2B is so clearly defined in the gaming world that it hardly needs a better definition than itself. It's a concept so well understood and accepted picking it apart is not constructive Brushfire feedback, it's railing against the basics of miniature wargaming. A Sisyphean task.

I don't think that the First Aid thing would be that important, so I will leave that alone. However I do think that Brushfire needs an equivalent of the Warhammer's one inch rule. All game examples Alf mentionned earlier uses some form of it, and I do believe it is a necessity.

The scenario you describe sounds just fine. Even with only a 1mm gap. It was awfully precise and honest of you to make note of that gap. But given your scenario, if I was playing the hamsters, I'd just not place it 1mm away, and leave a small obvious gap. Purposely doing what you just described is legal in game terms, but makes you TFG.

Defining B2B as melee range isn't strict enough? It's the most strict you can be! Giving a "range" actually opens more avenues for arguments and TFGness. See Warmachine.

If a game gets interupted, or two people can't remember two activations later if things are B2B, maybe wargaming isn't for them. "Did that make a melee attack?" "Yes." "Then they're B2B." Easy.

Also one inch is, by definition and function, not relative. It's always one inch.

Warhammers one inch rule is less common than you might think. It some cases it is more disruptive than allowing models to move B2B.

Warmachine was just mentioned by Alf.

"Warmachine/Hordes - Charge adds +3 movement to a model's speed, and you may charge as long as you're outside of melee range, but you only get the charge bonus if you move at least 3 inches."

That is the one inch rule. Warmachine uses melee ranges because it helps dealing with the grace distance problem. It is not using B2B as a measurement of two models being in close combat or not.

That was my point. It is less strict than simply B2B. But the 1 inch rule and Warmahordes definition of "melee range" serve two different purposes! The 1" rule and PP "melee range" are NOT analogous and cannot and should not be compared to each other. The Warmahordes rule that you cannot declare a charge while in melee range is not the same thing as saying models must always be 1" apart. Especially considering in Warmahordes many players use "melee range" to attack outside of 1"! Also, the 1" rule breaks down in regards to charges. Charges are the vector for ignoring the 1" rule, so naturally all charges are declared outside 1"

1" rule - restrtictive, defines where you can move except outside special circumstances (charge into melee)

Melee range - permissve, defines where you are allowed to take a certain action, e.g. make melee attacks.

Also a Warmahordes charge is different from a charge in BF. Warmahordes charge takes place at the same time as movement and then precludes certain actions. A BF charge takes place in the melee phase and allows certain actions. They are also not analogous.

Neither of these mechanics from OTHER GAME SYSTEMS are fair or accurate comparisons for how OTLG has designed the turn structure for BF. And if we could, let's quit dragging other systems into this. This is a feedback thread for 2nd edition, not a "compare BF to other games" thread. I believe BF stands on it's own merits, and this includes its definitions and mechanics for charging, close combat, and models in B2B.

There is really very little to be confused about here. Every example you've described has been inside the rules, but yes, can be seen as beardy and TFG behavior. That's not an issue with the rules or requires rectification. That is an issue with the attitudes of the players.

I think there is a lot to learn from other games.

What I'm saying is defining the melee range strictly on "the bases of the models are touching" is not enough. It would be great if it would be, but reality in the way. There are all kinds of reasons why you can't do that. Bumps in the table, overhanging parts, or just simply being humans. When you play, are you place every model with engineering precision to b2b with other models? I guess no, it would take forever. l personally just put them in b2b-ish and call it a "close enough". And I believe the rules should account that.

The need of the grace distance rule is a clear evidence that something is missing here.

Are there any unit in warmahordes that can melee and has 0 melee range? I don't know, but I bet there isn't any.

I keep forgetting to ask, it's ridiculous how long I've been wondering this. Will you be putting the Mercs book into the main rulebook now? I don't see the point in having to download it seperately, it's just important as any of the faction specific options.

 Casey's Law wrote:
I keep forgetting to ask, it's ridiculous how long I've been wondering this. Will you be putting the Mercs book into the main rulebook now? I don't see the point in having to download it seperately, it's just important as any of the faction specific options.

No, we prefer to have it as a freebie PDF separate from any of the core books.

I am disappoint.

 Casey's Law wrote:
I am disappoint.

Look at it this way, you'll get free access to new and exciting mercs as we expand the mercs PDF.

 WhiteRoo wrote:
I think there is a lot to learn from other games.

We know there is, we all play other games besides our own. The reason why melee in Brushfire works the way it does is because we felt there was something not really found in other games.

What I'm saying is defining the melee range strictly on "the bases of the models are touching" is not enough. It would be great if it would be, but reality in the way. There are all kinds of reasons why you can't do that. Bumps in the table, overhanging parts, or just simply being humans. When you play, are you place every model with engineering precision to b2b with other models? I guess no, it would take forever. l personally just put them in b2b-ish and call it a "close enough". And I believe the rules should account that.

Melee range is designated as base to base in 40k you have a random charge range in 40k guess what happens if you fail that charge by the slightest sixteenth of an inch? You fail the charge and don't get to move but still get shot in the face by overwatch. So base to base is quite "enough" of a melee range. Bumps and overhanging parts are exactly what grace distance accounts for. And when I play, yes I precisely engineer where my models go so I can maximize the number of models in base to base because.those are the rules. If my opponent has 3.12 inches between me and his charge, he doesn't make the charge, but.if he needs 2 inches and my model's pike is preventing him from easily making the charge then i twist the model and let him get base to base. Of he still can't because of a tail or something then I note he does easily have the distance and its fine if there is some space. But if moves 5 inches forward to a model that is 5.25 inches away he can still charge, why? Because he is not in base to base. As to your base-ish, if you're charging me with hamsters, you better believe I'm going to make you charge precisely, and I would expect the same from you. The biggest thing is to just not be a colossal dick to your opponent. If you charge him and you're a little outside of 3 inches, and just move them "close enough" your opponent can ask you to measure it to make sure he isn't being cheated. Grace distance is to Brushfire what Wobbly Model Syndrome is to 40k

Are there any unit in warmahordes that can melee and has 0 melee range? I don't know, but I bet there isn't any.

No, because melee range in Warmachine is explicitly stated to be half of an inch and they sell a little template to check that. There are models that have 2 inche melee with reach and 4 inch melee on the charge but those are all specific exceptions as the rule for melee is a half inch.

To add to that in Malifaux or Warmachine a model can attempt to escape melee and when they reach the end of the enemy models meleerrange, that model gets an attack. If I'm not mistaken there is a similar rule in Brushfire...

To finish up clearly, melee distance is an actual rule in the book, grace distance is a piece of descriptive text to allow for thongs like bumps in the table, wobbly model syndrome, and overhanging models. Please stop confusing one of these as a feature of the other. Melee range is base to base, not base-ish with a half inch of grace distance.

I do not believe that expecting people to play nince will be enough on a Brushfire turnament. You guys want to hold tournaments, right?

Even if you move your models in such precisity, you still can end up creating questionably small distances between enemy models. It is not a problem most of the times, but when activations later you starting to refer that one milimeter distance between two models when you are activating yours to shoot then charge that model that is in this questionable millimeter away, t's... questionable if everything is right with the rules. It is not about being a bad player, you just want to win after all, while your opponent wants you to loose.

This could be solved with saying at the end of your melee phase if your model is questionably close to an enemy model, you either have to move yours in b2b, leave where it is if it's under the grace distance rule, or move it away to at least an inch distance. Or half an inch. Just not keep it in one millimeter.

Why would I have to move models after melee? Melee range is cut and dry and the best tournament scene I've see specifically has a rule that says to basically not be a dick. I refer you to page 5 of mk2 Warmachine or hordes rules.

There is no need to clarify this beyond what it is at this moment in time. Matt is more than welcome to tell me I'm wrong but I feel there would have to be changes to the melee phase and range to implement the changes you're suggesting

 Cyporiean wrote:

 Casey's Law wrote:
I am disappoint.

Look at it this way, you'll get free access to new and exciting mercs as we expand the mercs PDF.

I'd rather have it in the book honestly.

We'll be leaving B2B rules as is. If you feel you are having difficulties in your games remembering which models are in B2B and which are not, I suggest using tokens to mark models. Aquarium stones are quite popular in many games, and generally cheaper than buying gaming tokens.

We just finished going through the last few days posts and adjusting things. You'll see an update soon on WGV.


We would like to be able to put everything into the book, but the Mercs are currently being left out to save space/cost of the book. We're already on a threshold point for costs, forcing us to split the book into several books (4 Factions in a book). Its not ideal, but the other option is a much more expensive book, and we don't want to charge an arm and a leg just for the rules.

We might see about making the Merc's into a POD via WargameVault once beta testing is over for those that want a physical copy. Although, once you're at the table, the normal stat cards will tell you everything you need to know except for the resource cost.

Charge will be part of the melee phase then?

Its been part of the Melee Phase.

Charge is already a part of the melee phase...

"If the activating Model/Squad was not in B2B at the start of the melee phase, they may make a Charge move to bring them into B2B with enemy Models." - pg 19 of the 2nd end rulebook

Does that mean you can charge during a counterstrike if the slain models make enugh room for it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, what is the terminology? Charge then Melee phase? Because it has to have two parts as declaring a charge reaction has to happen after the charge was made, no?

Counterattack only allows you to make melee attacks, it does not allow a Charge.

Just like the Movement Phase is split between Walk vs Rush, the Melee Phase is split between Charge Melee vs Normal Melee.

In a Charge Melee, you make a Charge Movement, determine what Charge Reactions are occurring, then Make Melee Attacks.

In a Normal Melee, you make melee attacks.

Charge Reactions are declared after the Charge Movement is completed, pg 20 Charge Reactions.

So the terms are Charge Melee and Normal Melee, and Normal Melee does not allows you to move.

correct, Page 18 two entries: Charge Melee, and Normal Melee.

Normal Melee is what you perform if you moved into B2B, or if you started your activation in B2B.

Ouch, I didn't realise the factions were going to be split up too. What's the divide going to be? Will the rules be in both books or will it just be a secondary book with the leftovers in it?

Also what are the price differences in printing different ways?

 Casey's Law wrote:
Ouch, I didn't realise the factions were going to be split up too. What's the divide going to be? Will the rules be in both books or will it just be a secondary book with the leftovers in it?

Also what are the price differences in printing different ways?

A formal announcement will be made when the next update goes live, likely tomorrow.

AQ/CV/SY/VD | AX/CH/RB/ZA | AL/CE/FS/VU/VO

I'll keep an eye out for an announcement then.

Wait... Who's "AL"?
>.<

 Lockark wrote:
Wait... Who's "AL"?
>.<