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.

Hi all,

as you perhaps can tell by the title, some time has passed since I last seriously rolled dice. I am wondering if anyone would be willing to fill me in on what happened to the initiative stat line? I have googled around but the "story" so to speak seems scattered across a lot of different posts/arguments/theories. Anyone care to condense it down for me? I am interested in knowing why it was taken out - in response to what? And whether the game is improved? I am thus far enjoying 9th a great deal and have had good success introducing some friends with combat patrol. Still - perhaps I will have to go dig the 4th edition book out and use its rules a get to truly get a sense of "what happened" in the years I did not pay attention.

Thanks.

Simply put, they removed it from the game in 8th Edition. Instead of a Stat deciding when a model fights, units fight as a whole in an alternating manner.

It adds a tactical element to close combat rather than having select units be good or bad at combat based on one stat that can result in them dying before they ever get to do anything. Additionally, it speeds up the game since you don't go back and forth constantly when resolving some combats.

It was removed. Instead "faster" units get a better movement characteristic. Who fights first is now determined by who charged.

 Gregor Samsa wrote:
Hi all,

as you perhaps can tell by the title, some time has passed since I last seriously rolled dice. I am wondering if anyone would be willing to fill me in on what happened to the initiative stat line? I have googled around but the "story" so to speak seems scattered across a lot of different posts/arguments/theories. Anyone care to condense it down for me? I am interested in knowing why it was taken out - in response to what? And whether the game is improved? I am thus far enjoying 9th a great deal and have had good success introducing some friends with combat patrol. Still - perhaps I will have to go dig the 4th edition book out and use its rules a get to truly get a sense of "what happened" in the years I did not pay attention.

Thanks.

I don't recall GW giving any particularly complex breakdowns of why they got rid of it, but GW changed how they determined when models attacked in close combat and dropped Sweeping Advance, so it really didn't serve a purpose anymore, and had very little use outside of that except for the odd psychic power.

Kinda the same thing that happened with original RT era "Int" (Intelligence) and "Cl" (Cool) stats that just got rolled into "Ld" (Leadership) instead of having 3 different stats.

As to whether the game is improved, that's going to be hugely subjective, particularly relative to 4E. 9E and 4E are *very* different games and even the same armies can feel wildly different between these eras, and 9E is still very much a work in progress that's clearly hasn't quite finished development yet into whatever form GW ultimately wants it given the radical changes popping up.

Thats interesting that it only came out of the game in 8th edition. For some reason, I had the impression it was gone for a while.

How have factions such as Eldar/Dark Eldar adjusted? I understand that "faster" armies simply have "more movement" but that does not seem to be quite the same advantage as having units with high inititative getting the jump on an enemy in close combat.

I agree that "better" is subjective - perhaps poorly worded on my part, unsure of what I am actually asking. It does seem that 9th plays with less "confusion" than the old days I remember. On the other hand, I quite liked how some units simply couldn't feasibly damage other units. That definitely produced some frustrating game experiences, but hey, it was all part of the game to me....

I am currently revisiting Mordheim with the hobby group and we are enjoying it much more than Kill Team (not played warcry yet so perhaps an odd comparison). Anyway, thanks for the insight.

 Gregor Samsa wrote:
Thats interesting that it only came out of the game in 8th edition. For some reason, I had the impression it was gone for a while.

How have factions such as Eldar/Dark Eldar adjusted? I understand that "faster" armies simply have "more movement" but that does not seem to be quite the same advantage as having units with high inititative getting the jump on an enemy in close combat.

I agree that "better" is subjective - perhaps poorly worded on my part, unsure of what I am actually asking. It does seem that 9th plays with less "confusion" than the old days I remember. On the other hand, I quite liked how some units simply couldn't feasibly damage other units. That definitely produced some frustrating game experiences, but hey, it was all part of the game to me....

I am currently revisiting Mordheim with the hobby group and we are enjoying it much more than Kill Team (not played warcry yet so perhaps an odd comparison). Anyway, thanks for the insight.

In the current edition, attack order for CC is much more like Fantasy was back in the 4E days (which would have been 6E and 7E for WHFB), and faster movement helps you get off the charge easier. Most Eldar units, if they're the ones *being* charged, aren't going to have a great time either way generally, so it's not a huge issue. The loss of Sweeping Advance in general has far more impact on how the game plays as it makes CC dramatically less deadly, particularly coupled with the fact that you can leave CC. In and of itself, the loss of the Initiative stat hasn't had a huge impact on Eldar/Dark Eldar (to me at least), other issues have had dramatically larger effects on their gameplay.

Initiative gave protection in melee to non marine armies like all the eldar and the tyranids. It was the last bastion of 'speed as defence' by allowing these units to hit before their opponent so return attacks are lessened.

But as GW has been increasingly moving the game to a position where everything revolved around marine heavy stats, initiative was removed.

The new paradigm is toughness, wounds and save as the sole arbiter of how hard something is to kill.

I still prefer the initiative system because it followed the lore aspect of the game. the enigmatic elves for example being blindingly fast(but weaker than space marines) with a focus on finesse through centuries of aspect warrior training to parry or strike first translated into the game terms by initiative is more immersive to me. it is one of many reasons i went back to playing a hybrid version of 5th over every other edition of the game.

There still is initiative in the game, just not as a number:

Fight before any other unit fights (very rare)
Fight first (charging units and commonly used ability in army traits, units, stratagems, etc)
Fight "normally"
Fight last (rare ability on specific units or relics)

Initiative of old implemented an army-wide defensive layer against melee attacks for units which aren't actually meant to excel in combat. A melee-focused aspect warrior or autarch should be an agile fighter that can outmaneuver their opponent, but there is no reason for a war walker to have a higher initiative than a warboss.

My craftworlders kind of don't care that much about initiative going away because none of the melee units I actually use hit very hard when they're not charging.

* I don't use wraith blades because I just don't have any built.
* Seer councils are too expensive to see much use.
*Banshees and scorpions sort of bounce off of stuff.
* Shining spears aren't all that killy when they're the ones getting charged.

I guess my autarchs and phoenix lords care a little, but that's about it.

My drukhari feel it a bit more. Even humble kabalites used to be able to sneak a few cheeky wounds in before the enemy chopped them up. High initiative was huge for all my HQs and squishy wych units and melee mercs (incubi/mandrakes).

My harlequins really feel it. They used to swing before almost everything in the game. So in 7th, I could send them in to chop up a squad of orkz, and then they'd chop up most of the charging second squad of orkz on my opponent's turn. Now, they're very susceptible to the enemy's counter punch, and the strat that lets you interrupt after my first charger can make charging multiple harlequin units per turn an iffy proposition.

Regarding the whole "armies with high initiative now have high movement, so they're more likely to be the one charging" thing. This has not been my experience. For most aeldari infantry, their superior movement is just 1 extra inch compared to a guardsman or marine. Harlequins and a few exceptions have 8" or some other gimmicks. While there are aeldari units that can pull off very long charges, these are exceptions. Kabalite warriors getting 1 extra inch of movement (and losing the ability to disembark after their transport moves) did not get back speed-related benefits that they lost.

Aeldari might be in pretty okay shape at the moment, but I do feel that their speed isn't very well represented on most units in the army. I wouldn't necessarily describe them as high mobile compare to a new player; they just passively have a slightly higher movement speed and a couple scattered double move or advance + charge mechanics.

Initiative was dropped maybe because it was used so little in comparison to other stats. However, Initiative was crucially important for CC encounters in earlier editions, and as CC is a particularly meaningful and dramatic part of the game, I'm rather miffed that they got rid of Initiative. Fighting first in CC was huuuge.

Genestealers fighting first in the second turn of combat because of high I, for example.

Charging someone with a toe in cover? Initiative does nothing.
Oh every marine and his dog has grenades to counter this? Plenty of Tyranid/DE/daemon assault units don't.
"Because if everyone has a way of ignoring the rule why have the rule" or words to that effect.

Probably could have just... evolved that system, but junking it does probably streamline things. And there are always some issues of "this unit always fights first the end gg". (Maybe not competitive ones, but still.)

 Insectum7 wrote:
Initiative was dropped maybe because it was used so little in comparison to other stats. However, Initiative was crucially important for CC encounters in earlier editions, and as CC is a particularly meaningful and dramatic part of the game, I'm rather miffed that they got rid of Initiative. Fighting first in CC was huuuge.

Genestealers fighting first in the second turn of combat because of high I, for example.

It stopped making sense later on because they'd stratified Initiative too much (Eldar always got to go first, Orks always got to go last, that kind of thing). It works better in 30k where more things have the same Initiative and more equipment/rules give +/-1 to Initiative.

 Hellebore wrote:
Initiative gave protection in melee to non marine armies like all the eldar and the tyranids. It was the last bastion of 'speed as defence' by allowing these units to hit before their opponent so return attacks are lessened.

But as GW has been increasingly moving the game to a position where everything revolved around marine heavy stats, initiative was removed.

The new paradigm is toughness, wounds and save as the sole arbiter of how hard something is to kill.

Tyranids didn't really benefit much from it because they didn't have Grenades on most of their important melee units, which removed the benefit of their high I when charging through cover.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Initiative was dropped maybe because it was used so little in comparison to other stats. However, Initiative was crucially important for CC encounters in earlier editions, and as CC is a particularly meaningful and dramatic part of the game, I'm rather miffed that they got rid of Initiative. Fighting first in CC was huuuge.

Genestealers fighting first in the second turn of combat because of high I, for example.

It stopped making sense later on because they'd stratified Initiative too much (Eldar always got to go first, Orks always got to go last, that kind of thing). It works better in 30k where more things have the same Initiative and more equipment/rules give +/-1 to Initiative.

This should maybe go in the Proposed Rules section, but what if we brought back Initiative and just gave all units a 1-4 rating. So for instance...

1 (slow) - orks, 'crons, maybe tau.
2 (normal) - humans, some 'nids, maybe tau, maybe marines.
3 (fast) - maybe marines, some 'nids, most aeldari.
4 (really fast) - harlequins, slaaneshi daemons, some drukhari, phoenix lords

Then, give +1 initiatie for charging, -1 initiative if you lost a model to a gun with the "pinning" rule, etc.

The idea being that orks are more sluggish than humans but can make up for it by charging and/or bringing the right weapons. Ditto humans and eldar and so forth. The numbers are close enough together that you can probably go from swinging last to swinging first (or at least swinging simultaneously), but some armies will generally be swinging first. So orks that soften up some eldar with a pinning gun (artillery?) and get the charge off will swing simultaneously, but the eldar will go back to swinging first on the following turn once the initiative bonuses/penalties wear off. Those same tactics against an initiative 2 army would let the orks swing first on the ork turn but swing last on the human turn. Just a half-formed idea.

You could double up the move stat as initiative, if they just distinguished the wargear component of the stat - ie swooping hawks are m7 and their wings give them +7. But you use their 7 to determine who goes first.

This would mean that vehicles go first which kind of makes sense when they're diving fast to ram into you, but as the hitting on 6+ it wouldn't be too bad.

The relationship between racial movements is pretty similar to that list

 aphyon wrote:
I still prefer the initiative system because it followed the lore aspect of the game. the enigmatic elves for example being blindingly fast(but weaker than space marines) with a focus on finesse through centuries of aspect warrior training to parry or strike first translated into the game terms by initiative is more immersive to me. it is one of many reasons i went back to playing a hybrid version of 5th over every other edition of the game.

I would agree with this.

The current system just seems a bit of a mess and also breaks verisimilitude. Why does a squad fighting quickly on one side of the board somehow impede the initiative of an allied squad on the other side of the board, in a completely different fight?

Wyldhunt wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Initiative was dropped maybe because it was used so little in comparison to other stats. However, Initiative was crucially important for CC encounters in earlier editions, and as CC is a particularly meaningful and dramatic part of the game, I'm rather miffed that they got rid of Initiative. Fighting first in CC was huuuge.

Genestealers fighting first in the second turn of combat because of high I, for example.

It stopped making sense later on because they'd stratified Initiative too much (Eldar always got to go first, Orks always got to go last, that kind of thing). It works better in 30k where more things have the same Initiative and more equipment/rules give +/-1 to Initiative.

This should maybe go in the Proposed Rules section, but what if we brought back Initiative and just gave all units a 1-4 rating. So for instance...

1 (slow) - orks, 'crons, maybe tau.
2 (normal) - humans, some 'nids, maybe tau, maybe marines.
3 (fast) - maybe marines, some 'nids, most aeldari.
4 (really fast) - harlequins, slaaneshi daemons, some drukhari, phoenix lords

Then, give +1 initiatie for charging, -1 initiative if you lost a model to a gun with the "pinning" rule, etc.

The idea being that orks are more sluggish than humans but can make up for it by charging and/or bringing the right weapons. Ditto humans and eldar and so forth. The numbers are close enough together that you can probably go from swinging last to swinging first (or at least swinging simultaneously), but some armies will generally be swinging first. So orks that soften up some eldar with a pinning gun (artillery?) and get the charge off will swing simultaneously, but the eldar will go back to swinging first on the following turn once the initiative bonuses/penalties wear off. Those same tactics against an initiative 2 army would let the orks swing first on the ork turn but swing last on the human turn. Just a half-formed idea.

This has all the problems the old system had. It's just a needless nerf for melee specialists fighting against random rank&file shooting unit of other races. An eldar guardian (a civilian in armor) should not be vastly more agile in combat than a warboss or destroyer lord.
The decision how fights first should never, ever again be taken on an army basis, but only decided for each a unit.
I think the system we have right now is working well, though it could use some keywording and streamlining. Units like banshees or slanesh daemons have high movement and can reliably make long charges so if everything goes as planned, they will cut down their enemies before they can strike back. If a unit of orks suddenly appears out of nowhere (da jump or hidden kommandoz) even they will be taken by surprise and take a beating before being able to fight back and not magically avoid the entire ambush.

So if a unit should really be notably more agile than all other units, it should get a bespoke rule that allows it fight first, and exceptionally sluggish units could have an "always fight last" rule. Outside of that, there is no need for initiative.

 Jidmah wrote:

This has all the problems the old system had. It's just a needless nerf for melee specialists fighting against random rank&file shooting unit of other races.

So to my mind, the main downside of the old initiative system was that some armies (like orks) would basically always swing after faster armies (like eldar). What I'm pitching is a system where faster armies will generally swing before slower ones, but slower armies can take tools that potentially let them swing before or simultaneously with faster armies. This is a nerf for slower armies and a buff for faster armies, but that's sort of a feature of this proposal rather than a bug. Having a high initiative would raise a given unit's value. That would have to be accounted for with points costs, but I do feel there might be value in doing a better job of representing the speed of, for instance, a harlequin.

And speaking of harlequins, surely they're a melee specialist who would benefit from this rule rather than being nerfed by it, no? I feel like I'm approaching this with eldar on the brain while you're perhaps approaching it with more focus on slower armies like orks and 'crons?

An eldar guardian (a civilian in armor) should not be vastly more agile in combat than a warboss or destroyer lord.

We might have dramatically different understandings of the lore. A warboss or destroyer lord aren't necessarily "sluggish" (though they can be), but aeldari are all basically superhuman ninjas. They're like... Legolas in the silly barrel riding scene from the recent Hobbit movies. A guardian might be a bit less impressive than an aspect warrior, but they're literally superhumanly fast and agile. And that's the "civilian in armor." Politely, I think it is accurate to describe a given aeldari as "vastly more agile in combat" than a warboss or destroyer lord or anything else that isn't superhumanly quick.

The decision how fights first should never, ever again be taken on an army basis, but only decided for each a unit.

Sure. I'm pitching unit by unit initiative values; not army-wide initiative values. Now. Which ork unit should strike faster than a harlequin trouper?

I think the system we have right now is working well, though it could use some keywording and streamlining.

That's fair. I'm pretty okay with the system we have now. It's not perfect, but it's fine. I might just be very aware of the absence of the old initiative system because my armies generally benefited from it. I miss being able to take a few guys with me before they killed my harlequins in melee.

Units like banshees or slanesh daemons have high movement and can reliably make long charges so if everything goes as planned, they will cut down their enemies before they can strike back. If a unit of orks suddenly appears out of nowhere (da jump or hidden kommandoz) even they will be taken by surprise and take a beating before being able to fight back and not magically avoid the entire ambush.

Eh... I'm an Iybraesil player. I field banshees. They do complete long charges pretty reliably. They don't do much damage once they get there. But even if they did, it doesn't take an ambush via-psychic power to charge something at them in my opponent's turn. A squad of ork boyz that's just casually in the general vicinity can generally jog up to them, charge, and wipe them out. Which is fine, but I kind of miss being able to drag a couple of boyz down with me before I turn into a puddle of red beneath a pile of green.

And that's where the appeal of initiative lies for me. It's not that I can't get off charges. It's that I take a return punch on my opponent's turn. It used to be that initiative offered us a little extra protection against that counter punch. My Phoenix Lords could generally take some wounds off the character coming at them or reduce the number of attacks from the mob of orkz. My harlequins were basically guaranteed to get another round of melee off before they died (assuming my opponent didn't just shoot them to death.) We don't have that protection any more, but it sort of feels like some of our units are still designed around the days when we did. Most phoenix lords, for instance, don't have invul saves and thus get punked by a charging enemy character pretty easily. Back when they swung before most enemy characters, there was always that little chance that Baharroth would manage to take down the enemy character with his power sword before he could swing; and if he didn't, maybe he'd at least land a hit with the sword thus giving the character a -1 to hit. It's stuff like that that is just noticeably absent.

Again, aeldari aren't in an awful spot these days.

So if a unit should really be notably more agile than all other units, it should get a bespoke rule that allows it fight first, and exceptionally sluggish units could have an "always fight last" rule. Outside of that, there is no need for initiative.

Would you say something like a harlequin or wych should have an always strike first rule then? After all, the latter is so agile that it gets a 4+ invul save because of how quick and graceful it is. Phoenix Lords used to be initiative 7. Fair to let them always strike first? Troupe masters? How about genestealers? Slaaneshi daemons have an always strike first rule currently, and most (all?) of the units I just listed classically had an initiative stat equal to or better than that of a daemonette.

Hope none of that came across as combative. This is just a half-baked idea, and I'm enjoying discussing it.

GW stated in streams they felt it wasn’t adding much to the game anymore and was just there as it always had been. They removed it and used a different design for who fights first to add a tactical layer.

Hey, we used to have multiple stats that got combined into Leadership. Things change.

I do like the tactical element that comes in now Initiative has been removed. Don’t miss it one bit TBH.

Honestly I'm just glad that most Xenos races other then Eldar don't get shafted anymore because of Initiative. GW refused to give so many things Assault Grenades that would let them charge and still even get the benefit of their I stat.

That old merry go round was so old. Cover allow s you to fight before units that charge. Well, unless that unit had Assault Grenades. So everyone had to have Assault Grenades. So what was the point in cover impacting who fought first?

It seems like something that could have been fixed by having cover give -1 or maybe -2 initiative, rather than making units strike last. That way high initiative stats still matter, even without granades.