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.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I think charging letting you strike first is reasonable - but it has to be tamed by rules like step up.

This I agree with.

In earlier editions of WHFB, combat casualties reduced the number of models eligible to fight.

So, if two units of equal frontage are in combat? We’d be say, 5 on 5. I strike first, and I cause 4 casualties. Those are removed from your rearmost rank(s) reducing your rank bonus. But, it also meant you counted as having 4 fewer models eligible to fight. The exceptions being unit champions and attached Characters.

But, and for the life of me I can’t remember when, “Step Up” was introduced, which meant whilst I still reduced your overall rank bonus, I could no longer deny you your full attacks, as it’s presumed those in the following ranks stepped forward, and so could fight.

Casualties removing the ability to fight back was there in 7th ed. 8th ed fixed that problem and I hope The Old World doesn't bring it back. It's one of the dumber rules that plagued Fantasy.

 Just Tony wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:
Who thinks the charging strikes first rule will be there?



I think it will be fought in order of initiative, like 8th. Without (elvish) ASF re-rolls.

Cyel wrote:
Yes, I am wondering how GW will solve the Elf Infantry Dilemma this time.

Army Special Rules. That’s what they’re for

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Charge Strikes First is essential to the game.

It's an exception to the rules that creates more exceptions and isn't even a particularly good representation of the benefits of charging.

A bonus to Strength, a modifier to combat resolution, even a flat Initiative bump would all be better than completely invalidating a whole statistic during the most important part of an engagement.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

I disagree. Chargers Strike First is incentive to be making, not receiving, the charge. Which in turn incentivises good play and clever manouvering.

Especially for slow I troops (Zombies, Skellingtons, Orcs, Stunties), take that away and….why ever bother charging? For high I stuff (Elves and upwards) the same applies. If I’m going first anyway, where’s my incentive for controlling the flow of the battle?

Charge Strikes First is essential to the game.

We actually agree on the importance of an advantage in charges. I was just saying that strike first in charges made the Initiative stat in Warhammer Battle profiles a bit useless before V8.

Honestly, I can see a TOW game with strike first in charges. I just think the Initiative stat in such a game may be deemed unimportant and simply be removed for simplicity sake.

Only if a combat went beyond the first round, which was never guaranteed. And against some forces (Undead, Stunties) very much the exception than the norm, thanks to either really solid Ld and a Tough Unit, or how they took break tests.

For stuff like High Elves? Give them perks in army rules. Exceptions etc. Don’t factor it into the basic rules, because chances are you’re gonna end up with Another Oddity, which in turn would need another fix.

Sarouan wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

I disagree. Chargers Strike First is incentive to be making, not receiving, the charge. Which in turn incentivises good play and clever manouvering.

Especially for slow I troops (Zombies, Skellingtons, Orcs, Stunties), take that away and….why ever bother charging? For high I stuff (Elves and upwards) the same applies. If I’m going first anyway, where’s my incentive for controlling the flow of the battle?

Charge Strikes First is essential to the game.

We actually agree on the importance of an advantage in charges. I was just saying that strike first in charges made the Initiative stat in Warhammer Battle profiles a bit useless before V8.

Honestly, I can see a TOW game with strike first in charges. I just think the Initiative stat in such a game may be deemed unimportant and simply be removed for simplicity sake.

What I would do:

- Remove Initiative stat from the game & Remove Strike first from the game
- Everyone strikes simultaneously
- Charging bonus: +1 to hit/+1 to S/bonus to combat resolution/whatever...

This is how many other good modern wargames deal with it.

That's similar to Warmaster rules, which is also from 2000 already.

And as discussed before, the Elf Infantry Problem can be addressed by adjusting the to-hit table to make high WS more valuable as a defensive stat.

I wouldn't put money on it happening, but given that GW just did exactly that for HH2.0, it would not surprise me at all if they do the same for TOW.

3rd edition once again handled charging a bit better.

A charging unit added +1 to hit in the first round and added +1 to the combat resolution. This was a massive bonus with D6 rolls. Initiative determined striking order with bonuses for weapons.

A 2 handed weapon decreased your initiative while a long weapon increased it in the 1st round.

I am a very ancient Warhammer player but I am starting to feel sorry for those who missed out on 2nd and 3rd editions.

The army list took the time to determine min and max per unit, not a generic 10+ which allowed for gigantic regiments. There are still a few armies that could take such units but they are quite limited. They gave a maximum model count per army also. Units ignored break tests until they had taken 25% losses from starting strength.

Those version are not perfect and really relied on someone to create a scenario and act as game master.

I am hoping this new version is usable and the more they lean on very old versions the more I will like it.

Main problem with elves is they're elves. They never needed to have strike 1st as a general rule in V8, their initiative was already high enough from the start.

Initiative works well once elves aren't involved.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Only if a combat went beyond the first round, which was never guaranteed. And against some forces (Undead, Stunties) very much the exception than the norm, thanks to either really solid Ld and a Tough Unit, or how they took break tests.

For stuff like High Elves? Give them perks in army rules. Exceptions etc. Don’t factor it into the basic rules, because chances are you’re gonna end up with Another Oddity, which in turn would need another fix.

No.

The game requires initiative to function and there are and should be unit types that should not want to always charge spearmen f.e. vs twohanded weapons, the real differentiation could come in with the weaponry which could also benefit from added subtype effects.

Charging could give itself a bonus to initative and attacks. But Always first always last needs to go. Granularising WS difference as was brought up in combination with deeper weapon attributes would be a better solution.

Spears +1 ini +1 S against charging units +2 against cav that charges them, Pikes + 2 ini and bonus ranks, etc. etc. You could even tie in potential orders to form specific formations to weapon type. Like a square formation of spears that don't loses ranks when flanked but is more vulnerable to enemy ranged attacks and can't move.

No.

Player moves should beat stats every time, because players should be rewarded for making good moves nor for their units being given good stats by the whims of the designers.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Only if a combat went beyond the first round, which was never guaranteed. And against some forces (Undead, Stunties) very much the exception than the norm, thanks to either really solid Ld and a Tough Unit, or how they took break tests.

For stuff like High Elves? Give them perks in army rules. Exceptions etc. Don’t factor it into the basic rules, because chances are you’re gonna end up with Another Oddity, which in turn would need another fix.

No.

The game requires initiative to function and there are and should be unit types that should not want to always charge spearmen f.e. vs twohanded weapons, the real differentiation could come in with the weaponry which could also benefit from added subtype effects.

Charging could give itself a bonus to initative and attacks. But Always first always last needs to go. Granularising WS difference as was brought up in combination with deeper weapon attributes would be a better solution.

Spears +1 ini +1 S against charging units +2 against cav that charges them, Pikes + 2 ini and bonus ranks, etc. etc. You could even tie in potential orders to form specific formations to weapon type. Like a square formation of spears that don't loses ranks when flanked but is more vulnerable to enemy ranged attacks and can't move.

But Spears allow you to fight in more ranks, bringing more oomph to your battle line. That is their advantage. Or the +1 S on the charge instead if you were mounted. You could also make use of your shield in combat.

Sword and Board gave +2 armour on top of whatever else (so 3+ with Heavy, 4+ with light, 5+ with your undies and good intentions)

Halberds gave +1 S, but required two hands, so no shield in combat.

Great Weapons have +2 S, required two hands and Struck Last.

So there are already weapon perks and drawbacks. Each suited to a different task.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cyel wrote:
No.

Player moves should beat stats every time, because players should be rewarded for making good moves nor for their units being given good stats by the whims of the designers.

Pretty much this. WHFB has always been won in deployment and the movement phase. Always. That’s when you sort your battle line. Do I castle? Maybe Refused Flank. Am I packing Scout type units to harry your flankers and potentially block marching?

Once I see how my deployment measures up to my opponent, that’s when I develop strategies on the fly. Which unit gets a face full of artillery? Who gets to play Traffic Accident with my Chariots? Which unit are my Cavalry most likely to break on the charge?

Botch that? And the game punished you - if your opponent knew what they were doing.

Now it wasn’t perfect. Skirmish Heavy armies were a drag to play against. Static Gunlines, like the Dwarf Gunline of Numbing Inevitability reduced my entire strategy to “get across the board as quick as I can, and hope to heck I’ve enough stuff left to mulch his infantry”.

But I genuinely don’t recall anyone complaining that Chargers Struck First. Indeed, High Elves gaining ASF was quite the controversy at the time.

Sarouan wrote:
Main problem with elves is they're elves. They never needed to have strike 1st as a general rule in V8, their initiative was already high enough from the start.

Initiative works well once elves aren't involved.

Does it though?

Looking from an 8th edition perspective, I'd say the issue was less an "elf problem" - and more a "great weapon problem". Great weapons theoretically trade off the higher S and armour penetration for striking last.
But if you have poor initiative, you are striking last anyway. So its not really a trade off.

Do you think we may see actual scenarios this time?

It may level the playing field between infantry blocks and cavalry or skirmishers if only the former can control objectives.

Cyel wrote:
No.

Player moves should beat stats every time, because players should be rewarded for making good moves nor for their units being given good stats by the whims of the designers.

Then what's the point of having stats at all. Just say the charging unit wins.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

Cyel wrote:
No.

Player moves should beat stats every time, because players should be rewarded for making good moves nor for their units being given good stats by the whims of the designers.

Then what's the point of having stats at all. Just say the charging unit wins.

Stats determine how much you win

That’s an absurd counter argument.

The art is in learning how to best stack prospective combats in your favour.

Enemy got better stars? Hit harder, tougher, more attacks per model? Might want to go in with a flanking unit in support. Or maybe a Chariot for those delicious Impact Hits to really ramp up your Combat Res.

If they’re harder hitting? Sword and Board seems wise, as they’re more likely to have, let alone make, a saving throw.

If that unit can charge sideways? It makes it hard to flank them. If they’re gonna strike first regardless, my manoeuvres go without reward, as I’m on the hook for a Full Unit Kicking regardless.

That has been the traditional weakness of Elite Infantry, like Chaos Warriors or Ogres. Both can give and take a lot of punishment, but tend to be points intensive, leading to a smaller army overall. The trick to besting them is…control the flow of combat. Flank them. Rear charge if you’re lucky. Get as many bodies into that combat as you can.

Heck, even use ranged weapons to plink off ranks, tipping things further in my favour. I think the only time I’ve ever obliterated an enemy unit was landing an Empire Rocket Barrage slap bang in the middle of a Dwarf Regiment, and exceptionally jammy wound/save rolls.

That’s….that’s WHFB. That’s what the game is famous and well regarded for. Another game does it more to your tastes? Maybe that’s the game for you then?

I don’t want another war game with the Warhammer name applied as a sticker. I want Warhammer, The Game Of Fantasy Battles.

Cyel wrote:
Do you think we may see actual scenarios these time?

It may level the playing field between infantry blocks and cavalry or skirmishers if only the former can control objectives.

I am hoping so, I think that might be the reason they added a marching formation - scenarios may require rapid movement.

I wouldn’t say no to Siege!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
That’s an absurd counter argument.

The art is in learning how to best stack prospective combats in your favour.

Enemy got better stars? Hit harder, tougher, more attacks per model? Might want to go in with a flanking unit in support. Or maybe a Chariot for those delicious Impact Hits to really ramp up your Combat Res.

If they’re harder hitting? Sword and Board seems wise, as they’re more likely to have, let alone make, a saving throw.

If that unit can charge sideways? It makes it hard to flank them. If they’re gonna strike first regardless, my manoeuvres go without reward, as I’m on the hook for a Full Unit Kicking regardless.

You can have mechanics like spears interact with Initiative on a contingent basis; eg if you charge a ranked up spear unit they're going to hit you first, but if you flank them or disorder the unit before charging they lose the benefit. That incentivizes maneuver, disruption, and other forms of counterplay, which can translate into emphasizing player decisions more than a system where the charger has such an advantage that being the one to charge first is all that matters.

Again. It all depends on the implementation. Taking fairly minor mechanics in isolation and making axiomatic statements about them is not how good designers approach things. Having an initiative system does not automatically mean player decisions are subordinate to paper stats, it's just different.

But that’s not Warhammer The Game of Fantasy Battles, is it?

It’s like saying because Lager has bubbles, so should Ales.

If it happens, it happens and I’ll still play it. But I’m not a fan of people portraying it as some glaring flaw of the game’s overall design.

 lcmiracle wrote:
Speaking of 6th edition, what about that Intrigue at Court special rule for High Elves wher their army generals are selected at random?

Getting your general to be an LD8 Mage instead of your LD10 Noble would suck pretty hard...

Oh, wow. I forgot all about that rule. What a weird choice for that book.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Only if a combat went beyond the first round, which was never guaranteed. And against some forces (Undead, Stunties) very much the exception than the norm, thanks to either really solid Ld and a Tough Unit, or how they took break tests.

For stuff like High Elves? Give them perks in army rules. Exceptions etc. Don’t factor it into the basic rules, because chances are you’re gonna end up with Another Oddity, which in turn would need another fix.

No.

The game requires initiative to function and there are and should be unit types that should not want to always charge spearmen f.e. vs twohanded weapons, the real differentiation could come in with the weaponry which could also benefit from added subtype effects.

Charging could give itself a bonus to initative and attacks. But Always first always last needs to go. Granularising WS difference as was brought up in combination with deeper weapon attributes would be a better solution.

Spears +1 ini +1 S against charging units +2 against cav that charges them, Pikes + 2 ini and bonus ranks, etc. etc. You could even tie in potential orders to form specific formations to weapon type. Like a square formation of spears that don't loses ranks when flanked but is more vulnerable to enemy ranged attacks and can't move.

But Spears allow you to fight in more ranks, bringing more oomph to your battle line. That is their advantage. Or the +1 S on the charge instead if you were mounted. You could also make use of your shield in combat.

Sword and Board gave +2 armour on top of whatever else (so 3+ with Heavy, 4+ with light, 5+ with your undies and good intentions)

Halberds gave +1 S, but required two hands, so no shield in combat.

Great Weapons have +2 S, required two hands and Struck Last.

So there are already weapon perks and drawbacks. Each suited to a different task.

Which i know, but isn't the point. The point is that fight first last is not a good mechanic. You shouldn't just get rewarded for charging a defensive unit, like a hedge of spears or even pikes, just as you should not get rewarded for charging with pikes especially or foot spearmen.

Cyel wrote:
Stats determine how much you win

That doesn't work even in real life scenarios, much less in Warhammer, where the individual troop performance delta is much wider.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
But that’s not Warhammer The Game of Fantasy Battles, is it?

It’s like saying because Lager has bubbles, so should Ales.

If it happens, it happens and I’ll still play it. But I’m not a fan of people portraying it as some glaring flaw of the game’s overall design.

Saying that it isn't WHFB if it doesn't have fights-first/fights-last mechanics is every bit as arbitrary and nitpicky as saying that it isn't WHFB if it does have fights-first/fights-last in lieu of Initiative bonuses a la 3rd Ed. Those mechanics changed a lot over the editions, and are no more fundamental to WHFB's identity as a rank-and-flank fantasy game than the presence or absence of random charges or whatever other specific mechanics grognards want to gatekeep as True Warhammer.

It's also a red herring either way since this isn't WHFB. It's TOW, a new game in the old setting. It's banking on your nostalgia, but they're going in a new direction, and we've already seen new mechanics that have no direct corollaries to WHFB and may be in response to perceived flaws in WHFB's rules. And if Horus Heresy and Legions Imperialis are any indication, players expecting TOW to essentially be WHFB 9th Ed will likely be disappointed.

Focus less on the trees and more on the forest. It will be the sum of things and the overall feel of the end result that matters, not picking out individual mechanics as purity tests.

 Scottywan82 wrote:

 lcmiracle wrote:
Speaking of 6th edition, what about that Intrigue at Court special rule for High Elves wher their army generals are selected at random?

Getting your general to be an LD8 Mage instead of your LD10 Noble would suck pretty hard...

Oh, wow. I forgot all about that rule. What a weird choice for that book.

That was one of the best rules GW ever wrote. Watching people seeth over it was often times the only fun to be had when playing a High elves player.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I wouldn’t say no to Siege!

As someone with a fortress, siege tower, battering rams, etc. I would say that I won't adopt this system unless there are siege rules. I don't want to play a siege every time I play Warhammer, but every once in a while is a lot of fun!

 catbarf wrote:
And as discussed before, the Elf Infantry Problem can be addressed by adjusting the to-hit table to make high WS more valuable as a defensive stat.

I wouldn't put money on it happening, but given that GW just did exactly that for HH2.0, it would not surprise me at all if they do the same for TOW.

^^^^ this, or you go the sort of route MESBG has with the "duel" role and have a stat whereby the blasted pointy ears win draws via a higher stat and when there is still a draw win more often

you need a way for training to matter, but also a way its not "I have five elves, you lose sucker"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its actually interesting to think about what actually makes Warhammer, well Warhammer? and not something else

- the way movement and positioning matters, for better and for worse
- "herohammer" to some level
- "he who throws the most dice wins" mechanics
- the "to hit-to wound - to save" dice ordering system
- individual model removal
- lack of any real command and control system
- psychology system that half the armies can ignore

and then usually some sort of magic system that seriously unbalances the game in some way

the Fisrt/last or initiative thing has changed often enough it hardly matters, its for "TOW" about getting the flavour of the game

and so far we have seen how units are organised and how they move and it more or less fits, the new march column (which seems a more or less direct read in from Black Powder and similar) makes sense and may perhaps lead into longer games to allow movement to matter

there are certainly signs so far that some of the older edition flavour is coming back, but also some more modern solutions to some of the problems of earlier editions with the changes to charge distances so they are not 100% sure things but also not something you are going to usually be doing on the second turn.

it feels like this should be more than "pile forward and six dice a super spell" (ala 8th) and more than "who gets the charge roll on turn 2" (8th again) while removing the "I can stop you ever charging me while I can always charge you" (7th and earlier) stuff

dare I say it but the game may actually be decided by movement and combat at a more tactical level and not who can better judge a quarter of an inch visually or is best able to gimp the no pre-measure stuff