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.

This is a topic I have a harsh opinion about but rarely see discussed. I think that insane bravery the stratagem should be removed entirely. The stratagem allows horde armies to safely go max squad sizes, and abuse buffs to their fullest without risking huge moral losses. This all but removes the biggest negative of large squad sizes. Removing insane bravery or retooling it to be a minor bonus to leadership would overall be healthier to the game.

100% disagree. Hordes keep the game powercreeping at check. Remove hordes and it's going to be Magnuses vs Knights vs Greater Daemons.

I would say hordes need some buffing, if anything. There is so much shooting available in the game with more coming in all the time (see chainreaper cannons) that removing the whole "max squad" of horde units by just killing half of it is very easy to achieve, essentially forcing your opponent to spend their CP on insane barvery.

I don’t necessarily think hordes need to be punished more, I think the game is far to focused on minimum sized units, super strong characters/monsters/vehicles. Anything that encourages more troops and infantry is a good thing as far as I’m concerned.

On the other hand, I dislike the current morale mechanic and leadership in general. I’d much prefer to see a much more involved system, with different levels of failure, pinning, broken units, rallying and the like, and I feel that there’s far too many abilities and units that allow morale to be ignored altogether.

How much of a retooling would you want to see for insane bravery? Something along the lines of only removing one model for a failed morale check, or halving the number of models to be removed when you fail a morale check?

How much of a retooling would you want to see for insane bravery? Something along the lines of only removing one model for a failed morale check, or halving the number of models to be removed when you fail a morale check?

Removing it entirely is a no-go. There are many units in the game that would be utter trash if you couldn't mitigate Moral somehow. And I'm not even referring to the ones that ALREADY have some kind of Moral mitigation

Now I will agree that Insane Bravery is a bit too reliable, but it's also 2CPs.
I could see it reworked to still result in some models fleeing, though.
Maybe make IB a 1/3CP Strat. Pay 3CPs to ignore Moral as it is now, or only pay 1CP to half the casualty penalty to the test (rounding down).

So if a unit lost, say 7 models, instead of applying +7 to your Moral roll, you only apply +3? For the cost of 1CP.
But if you lost, say 12 model and have a really low LD, you spend 3CPs to ignore the test instead

Remember also that IB is a Stratagem, meaning it only applying to 1 unit per turn in Matched Play. So either your opponent only has 1 big Horde to use it on, or you have the opportunity to cause Moral to multiple units. So select your targets wisely

-

Exactly what units would be utter trash without the ability to flat ignore morale?
Most armies have ways to mitigate morale, maybe not as much as you'd like but seriously the phase may aswell not exsist in the current rules.

Daemons.

Ice_can wrote:
Exactly what units would be utter trash without the ability to flat ignore morale?
Most armies have ways to mitigate morale, maybe not as much as you'd like but seriously the phase may aswell not exsist in the current rules.

I'd much rather have the phase not exist at all than having to deal with the current mess.

Seriously, who had the bright idea that large units should be affected by morale more than small ones? Thats some quality nonsense imo.

I agree.

But remove Morale entirely while you're at it.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I agree.

But remove Morale entirely while you're at it.

Agreed. The design space for morale can be so much more than what it is.

 skchsan wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I agree.

But remove Morale entirely while you're at it.

Agreed. The design space for morale can be so much more than what it is.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing morale as a special rule for especially cowardly units.

Grots and Conscripts could have a harsh one, ordinary Guardsmen a little bit less harsh, Veteran Guard, Scions, and Tau a minor one, and stuff like Marines, Warriors (Necron or Nid), Orks (except Grots), Ad Mech, and all the rest nothing.

Because there are so many reasons that a Marine should NOT flee the battlefield. Same with mindless and soulless Necrons. Or battle-crazed Orks.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I agree.

But remove Morale entirely while you're at it.

Agreed. The design space for morale can be so much more than what it is.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing morale as a special rule for especially cowardly units.

Grots and Conscripts could have a harsh one, ordinary Guardsmen a little bit less harsh, Veteran Guard, Scions, and Tau a minor one, and stuff like Marines, Warriors (Necron or Nid), Orks (except Grots), Ad Mech, and all the rest nothing.

Because there are so many reasons that a Marine should NOT flee the battlefield. Same with mindless and soulless Necrons. Or battle-crazed Orks.

True. Morale as a penalty phase mechanism is a waste of design space.

I think it could be interesting to see morale phase/Ld characteristic used as an "uncertainty" modifier that affects the units as the battle rages on, similar to how damage table works for units with +10W's. But it may be too much bookkeeping.

 skchsan wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I agree.

But remove Morale entirely while you're at it.

Agreed. The design space for morale can be so much more than what it is.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing morale as a special rule for especially cowardly units.

Grots and Conscripts could have a harsh one, ordinary Guardsmen a little bit less harsh, Veteran Guard, Scions, and Tau a minor one, and stuff like Marines, Warriors (Necron or Nid), Orks (except Grots), Ad Mech, and all the rest nothing.

Because there are so many reasons that a Marine should NOT flee the battlefield. Same with mindless and soulless Necrons. Or battle-crazed Orks.

True. Morale as a penalty phase mechanism is a waste of design space.

I think it could be interesting to see morale phase/Ld characteristic used as an "uncertainty" modifier that affects the units as the battle rages on, similar to how damage table works for units with +10W's. But it may be too much bookkeeping.

Trust me, you don't want that, it get's tedious and annoying as heck and if random even worse overall.

 Not3GrotsInATrenchcoat wrote:
This is a topic I have a harsh opinion about but rarely see discussed. I think that insane bravery the stratagem should be removed entirely. The stratagem allows horde armies to safely go max squad sizes, and abuse buffs to their fullest without risking huge moral losses. This all but removes the biggest negative of large squad sizes. Removing insane bravery or retooling it to be a minor bonus to leadership would overall be healthier to the game.

Shoot at more than one squad then? They can only use it once and the threshold for morale is rather punishingly low for actual horde sized squads.

Insane bravery is the only thing I have that lets me stay on a point while a knight tries to take it, between that and cult reinforcements I have half a prayer of delaying a knight long enough to kill it with something else. That's 2 CP a turn to attempt to hold a single point, and frankly after two turns the unit is usually dead anyway. The key to undermining it has consistently been when my opponent was smart enough to split their fire across multiple squads. That way I have a pair of weaknesses to exploit in a follow up, and there's a whole lot less of an answer to that than attempting to just delete units.