PDA

View Full Version : I am writing the 8th ed book!



Dooks Dizzo
10-11-2009, 18:49
Okay actually I'm not.

But if I was...

I'd like to do some fun wishlisting for 8th ed. If the thread goes well and everyone behaves maybe we can look back at this thread an see how accurate we werewhen the new book arrives.

So please, play nice make suggestions, postulate idea's and remember that yours is not the only army that gets played!

For my part I'd like to see some of the following:

Dispel scrolls no longer auto shut down spell. Instead they work like power stones. You get to add 2 dice to a dispel attempt. As an added bonus you can reroll 1's generated by the bonus dice one.

Pool power dice generation made random, generating a D3 dice each magic phase. (This is more a backstory thing as the winds of magic are fickle.)

Level 4 wizards may choose to exchange one spell rolled for ANY spell of the lore, not just the first.

+1 to dispel any spell cast on a single dice.

8 lores from the main book get a bit of a boost.

Cavalry cause a single impact hit at the strength of their mount on the turn they charge. (losing their normal mount attack)

Chariots break ranks on the turn they charge, regardless of unit strength.
S7 no longer blows chariots to hell.

Ranked infantry armed with spears, shields and hand weapons may allow the front rank to fight with shield/hand weapon while the back rank attacks with spears.

Daemonic Ward Saves bypassed by magical attacks (booyeah!)

'Clipping' officially resolved.

Units only autobreak from fear causers if outnumbered by 5 or more. (Terror remains the same)

+1 combat res for outnumber
+2 for outnumber 2-1
+3 for outnumber 3-1

Unbreakable units who lose combat strike last in the next combat phase (too much?)

ASF for 1st round of combat only? (Like Hatred basically)

Now no one lose their mind or anything. These are just idea's that bounce around in my head. Nothing play tested or anything.

mdiscala
10-11-2009, 18:52
Single fire bolt throwers don't change their trajectory when they hit a unit.

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 18:53
I'd get rid of striking first on a charge. Give them +1A or +1S or something, but not striking first.

Dooks Dizzo
10-11-2009, 18:54
Single fire bolt throwers don't change their trajectory when they hit a unit.I like this. I'd also like for the bolt to continue on until it's strength runs out. If it hits a single rank unit, it should travel and hit the next n line (at -1 strength).

Malorian
10-11-2009, 19:00
I'd get rid of striking first on a charge. Give them +1A or +1S or something, but not striking first.

Horrible idea... that would take out all the importance of the movement phase and trade it for the lame 40k version.


"Ah ha! My flayed ones will charge your genestealers before they hit my necron warriors!"

"Um ok... I strike first and you're all dead..."

"$@%@#%#!!!!"

Leo85
10-11-2009, 19:05
Rules are pretty good to me, just tone down some books, it's way too crazy with some books hehe.

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 19:07
Horrible idea... that would take out all the importance of the movement phase and trade it for the lame 40k version.


"Ah ha! My flayed ones will charge your genestealers before they hit my necron warriors!"

"Um ok... I strike first and you're all dead..."

"$@%@#%#!!!!"

It would make Initiative a useful statistic again and simultaneously devalue all of the ASF items/rules/abilities for high Initiative armies.

It would also give chargers an advantage for charging ASF units.

I would also get rid of the strikes last penalty for Great Weapons. Replace it with a -1 or -2 I penalty, give Spears a +2I bonus and Halberds +1.

The movement phase would be just as important for positioning, overrun/pursuit paths and so on, you would just have to pick your fights.

Felworth
10-11-2009, 19:09
What Slicktober said.

Grimstonefire
10-11-2009, 19:15
I would split ward saves so that some can ignore war machines, but the type that the average infantry gets cannot. Or adjust it so that only large targets with ward saves can take it after being hit by war machines.

Drakcore Bloodtear
10-11-2009, 19:18
I think that ASF should be instead for all other rounds so if the enemy charged then they could have a chance

I love the Dispell scroll idea :)

Helberd: first rank gets +1S while the second rank can fight but doesn't get the S bonus

Maybe all ward save negated by Magical attacks?

That's all for now

Maoriboy007
10-11-2009, 19:18
Dispel Scrolls should be 20 points and Fail on a dice roll of a one.

When charging skirmishers, the closest model should count as the centre of the unit.

Spell lores improved, would like to see things like ward saves and combat buffs.

March blocking units need to be US 5.

Allow marching through difficult terrain.

Clipping should be resolved like the "free wheel" except its a "free slide".

Killing blow in a challenge should only remove all remaining wound and the rest count as a single wound (and this is a VC player talking here!)

Agree with getting rid of the Str 7 auto destroy chariots thing, or even make it str 8 instead.

Fix monster and handlers skirmisher rule, hydras shouldn't be able to run through trees unless all monters can.

Maybe ASF models get a WS or to hit penalty when being charged?

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 19:19
Killing blow in a challenge should only remove all remaining wound and the rest count as a single wound (and this is a VC player talking here!)
That's how it works.

Skyth
10-11-2009, 19:24
I would like to see sliding officially introduced as a rule to get rid of clipping.

I also would like to see the fear/terror auto-break go away. Instead, Fear gives a blanket +1 CR and Terror gives a +2 (With the leadership tests to charge, etc still there).

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 19:28
I would like to see sliding officially introduced as a rule to get rid of clipping.

And I would hate that!

Dooks Dizzo
10-11-2009, 19:32
Not a fan of changing strik first on the charge. I think it is a good mechanic only brought low by army books themselves.

I don't tink you should be able to be march blocked by a unit you can't see...

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 19:33
I don't tink you should be able to be march blocked by a unit you can't see...

Even if they are shooting you with repeater crossbows, blowpipes, magic, or just smell really bad?

Tauren
10-11-2009, 19:38
It would make Initiative a useful statistic again and simultaneously devalue all of the ASF items/rules/abilities for high Initiative armies.

It would also give chargers an advantage for charging ASF units.

I would also get rid of the strikes last penalty for Great Weapons. Replace it with a -1 or -2 I penalty, give Spears a +2I bonus and Halberds +1.

The movement phase would be just as important for positioning, overrun/pursuit paths and so on, you would just have to pick your fights.

Actually this would be a horrible idea. Again, you just took away the entire benefit of getting the charge off. Extra attacks mean crap when you don't hit first. Lets take my army of choice that wins by combined tactics and getting multiple charges off, beasts of chaos. Now you give ****** armies with high init, the ability to basically be "always strikes first". There is no threat. Shoot wood-elves would basically be a "always strikes first" army at this point.

ASF is fine, learn to get around it. Chariots, shooting, magic, all of which will counter ASF, along with a nice armor save.

I would like to see march blocking only work with US5. US5 seems be the designator for most things, flanks, taking away ranks, etc. This would prevent abusive things like characters march blocking you while hiding in the woods, oh and by the way you can't see them.

Dooks Dizzo
10-11-2009, 19:38
Even if they are shooting you with repeater crossbows, blowpipes, magic, or just smell really bad?

More like they are behind a big block of woods or a building or something.

You'd also do well to drop your sarcastic tone, it's unbecoming.

Bac5665
10-11-2009, 19:39
I would hate sliding too. I'm ok with some better mechanic than any one that exists now, but I like clipping much better than sliding, so I would hate to just adopt sliding as the standard rule.

Though I strongly agree Malorian that getting rid of chargers go first would be disasterous for many things and indtroduce into fantasy some of the worst parts of 40k.

For 8E I want to see two things: balanced weapon options, and definitions with standardization.

The first is self-explanitory.

The second is much more important and involves a glossary, bolded terms, unit types defined and standardized (no more dang corpse carts which are infantry on cav bases and so on. These things are unnecessarily complicated because GW is way too lazy with their rules writing. It would have been far easier to simply call it a monster that isn't affected by things that affect monsters and doesn't test. Now it has a type, the exceptions are clear and there are rules for all situations. Very different from what we have now.)

I also want spells standardized, looking much more like a beastiary entry, with a standard "profile" if you will with ranges, target types, LoS requirements, so on, and the effects listed like special rules, along with any special rules like flaming attack and magic missile. That would be so much better than what we have now.

Maoriboy007
10-11-2009, 19:41
That's how it works.

Nope, according to the faq every Killing blow wound is multiplied by the remaining wounds on the character ( a 3 wound character suffering 3 KB would give away 9 total combat res in a challange, 3 for the wounds suffered and 6 more for the other 2 KBs!)
My main gripe with this is that multiple wound weapons are then a bit overpriced.

stiltjet
10-11-2009, 19:43
Just fix the army books..

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 19:44
Oh right. I forgot about that. My apologies.

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 19:44
More like they are behind a big block of woods or a building or something.

You'd also do well to drop your sarcastic tone, it's unbecoming.

You are imagining it. :confused:

Malorian
10-11-2009, 19:45
It would make Initiative a useful statistic again and simultaneously devalue all of the ASF items/rules/abilities for high Initiative armies.

It would also give chargers an advantage for charging ASF units.

I would also get rid of the strikes last penalty for Great Weapons. Replace it with a -1 or -2 I penalty, give Spears a +2I bonus and Halberds +1.

The movement phase would be just as important for positioning, overrun/pursuit paths and so on, you would just have to pick your fights.

So you would rather have the outcome of a battle to be determined by the stats the models have rather than what you do with them?

The very fact that you bring up that people don't like charging ASF troops shows you are wrong right there. Just as when you know you will be hit first when you charge high elves, the same goes for when you charge anything with a higer initiative.

So the change you are suggesting would only shift what units you are too scared to charge due to being wiped out before you hit back while at the same time reducing the need of using the movement phase.

In the end you would just see people getting more shooty (unless they played the high initiative armies) and basically just be playing fantasy 40k.

Jack of Blades
10-11-2009, 19:48
It doesn't take a scientist to figure out that you can:

- Shorten your stature in whatever way possible to let the rows behind you fire (blackpowder weapons).
- Shorten your stature in whatever way possible and/or fire above the heads of the front rows (bows and javelins).

... So please make some rules for this. I'm fine with WH being its own world and all, that's cool but this sort of thing is just really bad. But then again, if rules that don't make sense even in a magical, different world like WH are removed (such as -1 for shooting on the move, wtf on that one) then shooting would probably be overpowered. It would probably screw with close combat in WH if shooting was made as good as it really is, but ah well. I guess the ranged troops in WH as well as their officers are just really crappy at what they do, but it's more desirable to have it like this than Fantasy 40k I guess.

Malorian
10-11-2009, 19:50
It doesn't take a scientist to figure out that you can:

- Shorten your stature in whatever way possible to let the rows behind you fire (blackpowder weapons).
- Shorten your stature in whatever way possible and/or fire above the heads of the front rows (bows and javelins).

... So please make some rules for this. I'm fine with WH being its own world and all, that's cool but this sort of thing is just really bad. But then again, if rules that don't make sense even in a magical, different world like WH are removed (such as -1 for shooting on the move, wtf on that one) then shooting would probably be overpowered.

More models being able to shoot = shooting being more powerful = the game overall becomes more shooty = bad

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 19:54
@ Malorian

I don't think fantasy units cause anywhere near the same amount of casualties to each other as 40k units do.

What if we took away the strike first when charging rule, gave chargers +1S when charging, and allowed charging models that were killed in close combat to still make their attacks that close combat phase?

So they don't strike first, but even when they get killed by their enemy, they still get to attack?

R Man
10-11-2009, 19:56
Well I was actually working on the same idea. But exam preparation got in the way and I haven't finished yet.

But here were some of my ideas.

The tiered magic system, which I have explained several times so I won't do so again. But in compensation Mages should get to choose their spells and miscasts should be less harsh.

Then, like Bac5665, I think that codifying unit types would be better such as Monster, Heavy Infantry, Artillery, Heavy Cavalry, Light Infantry, Light Cavalry, Skirmisher, Chariot and Flier.

I would also drop the HW+S rule and introduce more universal special rules, like Expendable, which covers those units that don't cause panic when fleeing and destroyed and don't (or shouldn't) give up VP's from their flag.

But the biggest thing I would change is the initiative system. It would be your Base Init + 1d6 + any weapon/situation modifier. Roll each combat, in case of draws higher base init goes first and roll separately for characters. Chargers roll an extra d6 and choose the highest, while fighting with a great weapon costs 1d6 (so most GW troops will be on their base initiative), as does attacking troops behind a wall.

And finally, one for cavalry. In subsequent turns of combat, when neither side is charging, against cavalry the infantry may fight in one more rank than they normally would. This helps infantry fight cav. but doesn't penalise the cavalry for doing what it's supposed to do.

There is alot more that could be done of course, but there isn't really room for it.

grumbaki
10-11-2009, 19:57
Magic:

1. Dispel Scrolls cost 20pts and add 2 dispel dice to an attempt. Just like power stones.

2. I love the idea that each army gets a power/dispel dice pool of d3. Dwarfs get d3+1 dispel dice.

3. A mainstay rule for wizards, as in no more than half of your hero allowance can be used for wizards. Maybe with that we could get rid of the idea that you have to take full magic or get out.


Dispel Scrolls would no longer be a must have and overall magic becomes less of an issue. Sure, you can still throw spells around (a lvl 4 and a lvl 2 in 2k), but you can't go for a full blown casting army.


General:

1. When fleeing, if caught by pursuers take a LD. If failed, the unit is destroyed as normal (as the unit scatters and flees the battle). If not, then instead of a unit being destroyed when fleeing they take a number of wounds equal to what they were caught by multiplied by 2. For example. Unit A flees 7'' and Unit B pursues 10''. Unit A passes their LD test, so they take 8 extra wounds instead of being destroyed.

highelfmage
10-11-2009, 19:58
a lot of great ides.

i like to see black powder weapon when rolling 1 misfire and it hits the model shooting it. i dont mind bows firing in 2 ranks but maybe do a minus 1 to hit for the back guys you have a champion.(no one takes champion in their archer units)

Malorian
10-11-2009, 19:59
So they don't strike first, but even when they get killed by their enemy, they still get to attack?

Now that's a more interesting idea.


I still wouldn't drop the ASF rule though.

Skyth
10-11-2009, 19:59
And I would hate that!

It avoids a gamey situation where you have clipping and a unit that is 6 wide just sits there and only has one guy fighting for several rounds. Clipping is the worse solution.

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 20:00
No, I wasn't suggesting to drop the ASF rule at all. Quite the contrary. The change would just make it less valuable for high Initiative units.

Would Black Guard really need an ASF banner if they already hit most enemies first anyways?

Enigmatik1
10-11-2009, 20:03
No, I wasn't suggesting to drop the ASF rule at all. Quite the contrary. The change would just make it less valuable for high Initiative units.

Would Black Guard really need an ASF banner if they already hit most enemies first anyways?

No, they wouldn't. GW would just give them a regen or ward save banner instead. :wtf:

Cambion Daystar
10-11-2009, 20:08
a lot of great ides.

i like to see black powder weapon when rolling 1 misfire and it hits the model shooting it. i dont mind bows firing in 2 ranks but maybe do a minus 1 to hit for the back guys you have a champion.(no one takes champion in their archer units)

Sure, and drop them a few points while were at it

Einholt
10-11-2009, 20:15
Strength modifier on Regeneration.

str 4 and lower regen on a 4+
Str 5, regen on a 5+
Str 6, regen on a 6+

Higher, no regen.

I mean higher strength = More grievous wound, harder to regenerate. And it already stacks with armor and wards it's plenty good enough. But it fixes the recent regen spam.

If the individual book writers can't police themselves for including powerful rules and combination's then the main rule book should police them by adjusting those rules to reduce the power of the effects.

OP, the DoC ward is just a ward now, the only way to target DoC and VC would be to put a redefinition of Deamonic and Undead rules in the main rule book.

For magic

Lvl of caster = number of spells he can cast per phase.

Idle Scholar
10-11-2009, 20:17
I've got well though out reasons for all of these, honest ;)

Make a 'shaken' status that means you lose rank bonus (and possibly ld)
Reduce the number of kills from shooting, but any casualties = shaken test, but never a panic test.
Friends fleeing from combat, being fled through and seeing friends wiped out cause a shaken test in troops that are fine, and a panic test in troops that are shaken.
No movement penalty for units in difficult terrain.
Cavalry lose all charge and rank bonus in difficult terrain.
Cavalry get double rank bonus.
Polearms get a bonus vs cavalry to the fore.
Spears and pikes still get ranks fighting on the charge.
Cannons shooting up or down from a hill roll the bounce result twice and pick the lowest.
'Big' flyers get a minimum move distance.
Re-work of the magic phase to de-couple magic defense from magic characters.
Compulsory scenario generator.
Either 7 turns, or game ends after 6th on a 4+ or scenario dependent.

warhawk95
10-11-2009, 20:22
[QUOTE=Slicktober;4117070So they don't strike first, but even when they get killed by their enemy, they still get to attack?[/QUOTE]

So even though i killed his knight, he can still attack me...:wtf:. No leave charging the way it is.

For me I would like the following:

Change the magic system, whether it is PD are more random,a mainstay rule something so magic medium is viable, a caddie is not needed in every list, and magic heavy is not everywhere. I like the DS idea and think 20 points for an extra 2 DD is perfect. Also change the lores a bit, make some more support lores (like high magic), but keep some as damage too because fire should kill people.

Change weapons, make it so spears get +1S recieving charge. Make it so when the first rank is killed that the second rank getts to attack back,but -WS per a rank lost min (Infantry only). 1 WS.Make CR foroutnumbering so its done by ratio (3:1 +3 CR, 2:1 +2 CR, ect.). Add something so when a big monster goes down the army gets a boost. YES our knights just downed a giant, next round of combat they all become fearless or get +1 Ld. Something like, but make it so its only in close combat and only against monster higher than say US5 or 6. nothing OP, just a little bonus for downing that big guy, might see less of them too.

Finally I think that adding missions would do alot. Make it so there is like 6 missions ranging from kill enemy general, oppenents table quarters are double VP, capture X objective, and then some can be just normal pitched battle. roll a die whichever you get that is it. They are worth extra VP and make it so that core can only complete some of them. Not all, because making it so core can only kill the general is just dumb, but if they are the only ones to capture that relic worth an extra 400 VP then core are much more valuable. I think making it so they have to be above 10 US would help alot too.

There is proably more but that is all for now. :D

Enigmatik1
10-11-2009, 20:25
OP, the DoC ward is just a ward now, the only way to target DoC and VC would be to put a redefinition of Deamonic and Undead rules in the main rule book.


They should've done this anyway. Hopefully they'll get these two contentious rules right in 8E.

(Yes, I hate the Undead rule as it stands now).

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 20:28
So even though i killed his knight, he can still attack me...:wtf:. No leave charging the way it is.

Yes, the impetus of the charge lets his horse/mass/pointy stick still crush/stab/chop you to death.

When someone runs at you with a sword, even if you kill them the instant before their sword stabs you in the neck you're still going to die too.

Dooks Dizzo
10-11-2009, 20:37
Die but still strike? In effect it's 40K with units with the same init. Doesn't do anything for Fantasy at all.

blackjack
10-11-2009, 20:41
Re-work of the magic phase to de-couple magic defense from magic characters.


This is the single most important change that is needed.

Having shooters does not give you shooting defence, so not having shooters does not nessesarly hurt you against shooting.

But in order to have a hope of survival you must invest in one or more scroll caddies. The way the system works 2 level 2 casters will never get anything off, so you either go with 2 level 1 caddies or a lord caster with 2 or more supporting mages to have a decent chance in the magic phase.

I suggest that for every PD your opponent has available you get 1/2 that amount in dispell dice. This represents the fact that magic is unstable and more magic is even more unstable, it also means that people can run armies with no mages at all and that putting massive points into a ton of casters will not mean you get to run over your opponent who only brought a single scroll caddie. On the other hand it means that casters will tend to have just less than twice the PD than the opponents DD meaning moderate investments in casters can pay off as well.

Einholt
10-11-2009, 20:50
That's quite different then getting their attacks though. Thats like a single impact hit, as opposed to their possible 3 attacks or more for characters.

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 20:53
Die but still strike? In effect it's 40K with units with the same init. Doesn't do anything for Fantasy at all.

But it gives an advantage to units with higher initiative, because charged models with lower initiative will strike after the chargers.

So if you have high Initiative it's best to charge because you'll get the +1S and you'll strike before the charged unit, meaning you'll inflict casualties and get less attacks back.

If you have low Initiative it's still best to charge because you'll get the +1S and strike even after the high I unit kills a bunch of your dudes.

It provides a benefit to high Initiative units by allowing them to score casualties against chargers before they get chopped down.

In all cases, charging is the best course of action - something that isn't the case now.

Rockgut
10-11-2009, 20:57
To improve infantry:

Infantry units count as stubborn if they have at least 2 additional ranks (i.e. 15 models) at the start of the combat. Cancelling ranks (e.g., flanking) cancels this effect.

To improve Movement:

Only units with US 5+ can march block

Sparda
10-11-2009, 21:06
It doesn't take a scientist to figure out that you can:

- Shorten your stature in whatever way possible to let the rows behind you fire (blackpowder weapons).
- Shorten your stature in whatever way possible and/or fire above the heads of the front rows (bows and javelins).

... So please make some rules for this. I'm fine with WH being its own world and all, that's cool but this sort of thing is just really bad. But then again, if rules that don't make sense even in a magical, different world like WH are removed (such as -1 for shooting on the move, wtf on that one) then shooting would probably be overpowered. It would probably screw with close combat in WH if shooting was made as good as it really is, but ah well. I guess the ranged troops in WH as well as their officers are just really crappy at what they do, but it's more desirable to have it like this than Fantasy 40k I guess.

We thought the same thing. We tried to put it in the game and to be honest it failed. At first it was -1 for the back rank, but my friends handgunners just decimated units. At a -1 for the entire unit it was better, but we still thought it was a bit to overpowered. So finally at -2 overall it got better, but it really inspires my friend to take a gunline every time.

truthsayer
10-11-2009, 21:09
Dispel scrolls when used should give an automatic dispel score of 10. means they can still be used to dispel lower powered spells, however, you will have to roll another dice or two to get rid of the higher spells.

Simple.

Idea stolen from Prince Sairion!

warhawk95
10-11-2009, 21:21
To improve infantry:

Infantry units count as stubborn if they have at least 2 additional ranks (i.e. 15 models) at the start of the combat. Cancelling ranks (e.g., flanking) cancels this effect.


Why would skaven slaves,goblins of all varieties, gnoblars, even orcs, or a lowely empire knight ever be stubborn? Becasue they have men behind them? What happens if a knight dragon attacks them and now there 15 man unit is only 9? or less only 6. But they are still stubborn,no fluff wise this makes no sense, an elite infantry dont need that kind of boost.

@Slicktober

First off besides defensive units (most dwarves, spears, ect.) when is charging ever bad? You attack first. Plain and simple. And why should all units get to attack first, that doesnt make sense. If knights are coming straight at you, your not going to prepare for the attack, no your getting ready to go on the defensive bracing for the charge. What you are proposing would not benefit everyone. Low I armies get screwed all around. Now even if they do manage to get the charge, they can loose their units, and if they happen to be facing a unit that kills 5 of their models guess what no attacking back. Atleast before they could kill something. Now they get stuck with +1 S for there dead models.

Slicktober
10-11-2009, 21:25
First off besides defensive units (most dwarves, spears, ect.) when is charging ever bad?

Against nearly any ASF unit.

Einholt
10-11-2009, 21:37
I completely disagree, if your unit had a chance to beat most units w/o ASF you would and should still charge. There is no benefit in receiving a charge unless you are pulling yourself out of position in which case it would have been a bad option regardless of ASF.

By charging you deny them the ability to overrun and perhaps you gain a turn to keep them where they are if this is desirable.

Arkh
10-11-2009, 21:55
Charging should grant ASF for the round of combat. ie charging units should cancel out an opposing unit's ASF and bring the combat order to initiative.

Grimstonefire
10-11-2009, 21:56
Strength modifier on Regeneration.

str 4 and lower regen on a 4+
Str 5, regen on a 5+
Str 6, regen on a 6+


I would actually do it like this:

str 4 and lower regen on a 5+
Str 5 or higher, regen on a 4+

This would still make it worth taking for lord level, but not broken for core units...

Dooks Dizzo
10-11-2009, 22:11
Making regen effected by strength is a bad idea. If high strength bypasses regen it will also bypass armor, making regen completely useless.

Rockgut
10-11-2009, 23:02
[QUOTE=warhawk95;4117349]Why would skaven slaves,goblins of all varieties, gnoblars, even orcs, or a lowely empire knight ever be stubborn? Becasue they have men behind them? What happens if a knight dragon attacks them and now there 15 man unit is only 9? or less only 6. But they are still stubborn,no fluff wise this makes no sense, an elite infantry dont need that kind of boost.

It is just an idea to make the infantry blocks stronger. You don't have to call it Stubborn if the fluff offends you. It would just reflect that a mass of troops are fired up to go to war and would not panic and run away too easily. I don't think it is very fluffy that most Warhammer battles now are monsters and infantry. Again, just an idea.

Sirroelivan
10-11-2009, 23:52
I'd get rid of the random spell selection.
Making it so that for example lvl. 1's only got access to the first spell, lvl. 2's to the first 2-3, lvl. 3 to the first 4-5 and lvl. 4's to the 6 spells. Allows one to incorporate magic far more into one's army design, rather then just going for lots of levels to get that one spell you want.

Buddha777
11-11-2009, 00:06
Maybe I'm playing Total War too much but I think CC weapons could be far more individualized and realistic.

Spears should get +1 Str. against Calvary

Halberds get armor penetration and fight from 2 ranks

Bows range increased by 12" for each type respectively

Aratus
11-11-2009, 00:16
I'd get rid of the random spell selection.
Making it so that for example lvl. 1's only got access to the first spell, lvl. 2's to the first 2-3, lvl. 3 to the first 4-5 and lvl. 4's to the 6 spells. Allows one to incorporate magic far more into one's army design, rather then just going for lots of levels to get that one spell you want.

That takes away from the fluff of magic. The amount of spells someone gets is a reflection of how strong they are. Slann and Vamps are some of the strongest casters in the world because they devoted so much time to studying magic that they can cast anything they want. Right behind them would be most Elf Mages and Chaos Sorcerers.

It also takes away from the randomness of magic. Keep the rolling for spells, it isn't that bad.

lopezpie
11-11-2009, 00:23
I always thought archers should be able to shoot over the head of infantry at a -1 to hit i just thought it would be more realistic but idontknow

warhawk95
11-11-2009, 00:29
I completely disagree, if your unit had a chance to beat most units w/o ASF you would and should still charge. There is no benefit in receiving a charge unless you are pulling yourself out of position in which case it would have been a bad option regardless of ASF.

By charging you deny them the ability to overrun and perhaps you gain a turn to keep them where they are if this is desirable.

Thank you for typing it so i did not have too, this is the exact reason why charging ASF is good.

@Rockgut

This is why we have CR, the infantry blocks get bonuses for having ranks and outnumbering. Boosting these is a different story alltogether, but granting them an ability just for being a block of infantry doesnt work IMO. And I do agree getting more core units into the game is what we need, but that is why earlier I suggested scenerios being added to pitched battles and have some of scnerios based around units that are core and have above a certain US (proably around 10). This would force people to risk only taking archers or calvary as core, because if the rest of the army was dragons and monsters they might not be able to capture the relic for 400 VP. Sure if the person using the dragon army is that good and can wipe the table clean of his oppenent he desrves to win, but if not he could loose. This would force people to take more flexible lists.

Slicktober
11-11-2009, 00:44
That takes away from the fluff of magic. The amount of spells someone gets is a reflection of how strong they are. Slann and Vamps are some of the strongest casters in the world because they devoted so much time to studying magic that they can cast anything they want. Right behind them would be most Elf Mages and Chaos Sorcerers.

It also takes away from the randomness of magic. Keep the rolling for spells, it isn't that bad.
Uh... There is no "fluff" that I know of for a Wizard to randomly determine what spells he knows.

There's no amount of lack of training that a Wizard suddenly knows different things day to day. It makes absolutely no sense at all.

Buddha777
11-11-2009, 00:46
I always thought archers should be able to shoot over the head of infantry at a -1 to hit i just thought it would be more realistic but idontknow

I like that idea as well. It makes sense that guns shouldn't be able to shoot through units, but perhaps creating a volley mode of fire or something for bows since there is no reason bows would have to be a direct fire weapon.

mattieice
11-11-2009, 00:54
I would like to see something done with flaming attacks. I feel like they should do something beyond double wounds on flammable and negate regeneration.

Dooks Dizzo
11-11-2009, 01:05
I'd like to see LoTR style shooting for multiple ranks. Only hit on 6's but the whole unit can fire.

ChaosVC
11-11-2009, 01:36
Charger striking first has always working fine, there is no problem with the charging rule. Infact, initiative is working fine for subsequent combat phase even in the ASF rule. The problem lies in ASF army wide rule like HE, the damage is already done with a slightly overcompensated DE. So what can be done is rewrite those two army books.

Wizards rolling for spells and aquiring them randomly is actually quite silly. Wizard should IMO be able to prepare/chose their spell of choice, the number of spells they are able to use should depends on their levels. This also means that Game designers designing spells should make sure that all the spells are as useful as they can be and not just being too circumstantial. Perhaps the kind of spells they are allowed to chose should also be based on their lvl and only lvl 4s can take the last and usually most "powerful" spell" (6th spell). That said, if this is implemented, a certain level of legal tailoring would allowed in the game, but hopefully minimised. Whether this is bad for the game it self would wholly depends of the effectiveness of the spells design, pretty subjective IMO.

Wakerofgods
11-11-2009, 01:52
I'd get rid of striking first on a charge. Give them +1A or +1S or something, but not striking first.

This would be too big of a buff for cavilry which are already powerfull enough.

The cavilry don't care much about striking last against most things but extra offense would help alot if what they are fighting is a 'anvil' unit.

Dooks Dizzo
11-11-2009, 05:16
My init 6 Cold One Knights would love to be S7 on the charge.

The Red Scourge
11-11-2009, 05:31
And I would hate that!

Thats what would happen. Read the FAQ ;)

Lord Anathir
11-11-2009, 05:41
nerf monsters. boost rank infantry. Perhaps do it by making rank negation 5 models instead of US5. Maybe cap rank bonus at +4.

TroyJPerez
11-11-2009, 07:23
From what I have read i like the extra outnumbering bonus 3 to 1 for a +3. I think the best fix to ASF should be that it only works to the front of a unit. ASF should not work if you are hit to the sides or rear. The outnumbering bonus would make large units of cheap infantry very useful. A Bloodthirster would find it difficult to get through x3 outnumber +3, 3 ranks, +3 and a banner. Bloodthirster couldn't win against the unit in combat, if they had a mucisian. Assuming they were big enough to still outnumber x3 after taking wounds.

Lord of Skulls
11-11-2009, 07:57
I actually agree with the people wanting to remove the ASF rule, but I would instead replace it with an initiative bonus. For example: Charging units, units with ASF and units with spears (only if charged) get a bonus to their initiative, while models with great weapons and such get a penalty.

I think it might be possible to balance this in such a way that in most situations it would work out much like it does now, but remove the most extreme examples. (The guy with the ammo for the Bolt Thrower striking before a charging Bloodthirster and such...)

As for fixing the ASF rule in the HE book, it should only be given to the elite infantry, and to the spearmen when fighting to the front.

I also agree with whoever mentioned being able to march in terrain. Either that, or it should stop halving your movement. Both at the same time just makes it impossible for non-skirmishers to enter difficult terrain.

Storak
11-11-2009, 10:56
i really think we should just give suggestions in this topic, and leave the discussion and details to some follow up.

here are mine:

1. living rulebook. the new edition will be a child of the 2010s. a pure paper based system, with an update every decade simply wont do any longer.
minor changes, additions and clarifications need to be done constantly.

2. a significant change to clarity of rules and layout. the latest edition did not provide enough clarification for me. while 6th was a major improvement, 7th just made minor changes only. i expect a massive number of small improvements, and i want rules and "fluff" kept apart. i also expect to find rules at one location, and not sp#read out all over the book.

3. terrain should finally get a meaning. the current system, especially for woods, doesn t work at all and has never worked. we need terrain, that wont basically stop most units for the entire game.

4. re-establish static combat resolution. it is dead at the moment.

5. fix magic. medium magic should be they way to go, for most armies, not min/max.

Alathir
11-11-2009, 14:34
I think dispel scrolls should be 20 points, and simply allow the defending player to remove the two highest rolling dice from the opponents casting attempt. If the spell is still cast, the defender can attempt to dispel once more. Items like Spell-eaters and the Sigil of Asuryan that destroy spells on 4+ would suddenly become more attractive as I would leave them as instant spell stoppers as per their current rules.

Nuada
11-11-2009, 14:44
remove the ASF rule, but I would instead replace it with an initiative bonus. For example: Charging units, units with ASF and units with spears (only if charged) get a bonus to their initiative, while models with great weapons and such get a penalty.

That's how the game was in 3rd edition, i thought it was a huge mistake when they introduced the "charging always hits first" rule. I'd like them to scrap ASF and use the old 3rd edition rules.
All you do is give an initiative bonus to long reach weapons (spears, pikes, lances) and a penalty to slow weapons (Great weapons). Then charging gives you a bonus (think it was +2 a while ago)
Probably wrong (it was about 20 yrs ago) but i think pikes gave +6 initiative, spears +2ish, lances +2, Great weapons -2, charging +2. In the case of any ties i'd give charge prioity to the charging unit.

grumbaki
11-11-2009, 15:18
While it makes sense for wizards to pick their spells, just imagine where that would lead us too...

Lore of Metal: Imagine if you are playing as Bretonnians, and your dark elf opponent has 4 wizards. He decides that each one will know spirit of the forge. He can then easily generate power dice and cast that spell with all of his wizards. Not good.

Chaos: We really could get gateway lists...

Unless magic gets toned down, that could get really painful.

Sirroelivan
11-11-2009, 16:11
While it makes sense for wizards to pick their spells, just imagine where that would lead us too...

Lore of Metal: Imagine if you are playing as Bretonnians, and your dark elf opponent has 4 wizards. He decides that each one will know spirit of the forge. He can then easily generate power dice and cast that spell with all of his wizards. Not good.

Chaos: We really could get gateway lists...

Unless magic gets toned down, that could get really painful.

Well, put limitations on it, like making it so that just what spells you can choose depends on the wizards' magic level. Maybe even give each spell a separate point cost.

Kloud13
11-11-2009, 18:47
I would like to see Large Targets get some sort of ward save vs shooting attacks. Maybe even some sort of save kinda like the Bretonians blessing of the bearded lady. Currently, Giants, Griffons, ect are too vulnerable.

With Flying Calvary, one model in the unit is designated the unit Leader, and the unit's charge arc is based off the leaders front LoS. If Leader is killed, a new leader is picked Imediatly.

Dispell scrolls made 20 points, and Enchanted item , not an Arcane Item.

I like the Idea of D3 dice to your magic pool instead of just the automatic 2.

When rolling one dice to cast a spell, If a 1 is rolled, roll a 2nd dice, if 2nd 1 is rolled, it is a Miscast. (And maybe this too, If a 6 is rolled, a caster may attempt Irresistable force by rolling a 6 on 2nd dice, but a 1 on 2nd dice, is again a miscast.) And, the 2nd dice is not part of the Magic pool.

Hero's, and Lords, may always Rally, even if the unit they are in is below 25% (or is it 50% ?)

Any model touched by a template is hit. (no more 4+ stuff)

Get rid of Cannon sniping.

Find a way to make guessing alot harder with guess range weapons.

Arkh
11-11-2009, 18:59
What a bunch of terrible ideas.... With the exception of the d3 power die rule which is ok, but I don't really care one way or the other.


I would like to see Large Targets get some sort of ward save vs shooting attacks. Maybe even some sort of save kinda like the Bretonians blessing of the bearded lady. Currently, Giants, Griffons, ect are too vulnerable.

With Flying Calvary, one model in the unit is designated the unit Leader, and the unit's charge arc is based off the leaders front LoS. If Leader is killed, a new leader is picked Imediatly.

Dispell scrolls made 20 points, and Enchanted item , not an Arcane Item.

I like the Idea of D3 dice to your magic pool instead of just the automatic 2.

When rolling one dice to cast a spell, If a 1 is rolled, roll a 2nd dice, if 2nd 1 is rolled, it is a Miscast. (And maybe this too, If a 6 is rolled, a caster may attempt Irresistable force by rolling a 6 on 2nd dice, but a 1 on 2nd dice, is again a miscast.) And, the 2nd dice is not part of the Magic pool.

Hero's, and Lords, may always Rally, even if the unit they are in is below 25% (or is it 50% ?)

Any model touched by a template is hit. (no more 4+ stuff)

Get rid of Cannon sniping.

Find a way to make guessing alot harder with guess range weapons.

Einholt
11-11-2009, 19:30
... Do you realize how much a god damn small template touches. A stone thrower could erase 20 man small base infantry in 1 shot.....

Auto ward saves for large targets??? WHY IN HELL, they are already ruining the game, sure name Griffons and Giants. Ignore Hydras, Steam Tanks, Star Dragons, Greater Deamons..... dear god man.....

This is why these threads are moronic, people do not actually think before posting.

Hakkapelli
11-11-2009, 19:48
I like the idea about units becoming shaken by shooting. Make all shooting -1S to compensate. Shaken units may not march or charge.
*Pass Ld test at the start of turn to remove.

*Shooting from a units flank/rear gives the unit -1/-2 Ld on any resulting panic test.

Building on the shaken idea. Unshaken units that take a break test only breaks if it rolls above it's unmodified leadership. If they roll above their modified Ld it becomes shaken. A shaken unit that fails a modified break test is broken.

*Remove auto-break from fear causers. Fear causing units instead give a -2 basic Ld to all units in base contact.

*Stubborn units may not be shaken in close combat.

*New special rule: Drilled. Re-roll failed Ld-tests to remove shaken.

----Other Ideas-------------

-Barded cavalry may not march.

-Handguns may move and fire but have a -2 penalty at long range rather then -1.

-No rank bonus in difficult terrain.

-Half movement in difficult terrain but may march.

-Make hand weapon/shield bonus work against infantry only.

-Pole-Arms (spears, pikes, halberds etc.) are armour piercing against cavalry.

-Mounted bonus works only in CC, Barding only against shooting.

-Larger number of turns with each having a smaller impact.

-Base power/dispel pool size on size of battle rather then just a basic 2 dice. Fluff justification (slight retcon): Battle magic is some of the most difficult disciplins of magic. Not only is the caster often forced to cast his spells without adequate preparations and some times even when under direct threat from enemy forces. The greatest difficulty, however, comes from the fact that the sheer amount of basic feelings, fear, hatred, anger, plays havoc with the winds of magic. The effect is that, while a large battle may twist the winds of magic towards it, it also makes them much harder to fully control and many a sorcerer have felt his spells dissipate into thin air without apperant reason.

redben
11-11-2009, 19:53
I want see units no longer being march blocked by single models hiding in the woods that they can't even see.

Lordsaradain
11-11-2009, 20:50
Remove challenges (they are too bugged).

Allow multiple units charging in the front to lap round in subsequent turns if theer isnt enough room for them to get into combat in the front.

Rehaul the magic system; Remove all dispelling, and weaken spells accordingly.

Wizards should pay for specific spells rather than roll for them, this would be much more fair and balanced rather than getting new random spells every battle.

ChaosVC
12-11-2009, 01:48
... Do you realize how much a god damn small template touches. A stone thrower could erase 20 man small base infantry in 1 shot.....

Auto ward saves for large targets??? WHY IN HELL, they are already ruining the game, sure name Griffons and Giants. Ignore Hydras, Steam Tanks, Star Dragons, Greater Deamons..... dear god man.....

This is why these threads are moronic, people do not actually think before posting.

I hope people will not call you a sad panda and assume you can't take out large monster for being able to understand the stupidity of all this crap. Time to take out my old sega game "Masters of Monsters."

R Man
12-11-2009, 02:53
While it makes sense for wizards to pick their spells, just imagine where that would lead us too...

Lore of Metal: Imagine if you are playing as Bretonnians, and your dark elf opponent has 4 wizards. He decides that each one will know spirit of the forge. He can then easily generate power dice and cast that spell with all of his wizards. Not good.

Chaos: We really could get gateway lists...

Unless magic gets toned down, that could get really painful.

Well there are two things that should be done about this. First of all the army lists should be flexible enough not to relly on knights too much. SOTF is going to do jack against 100 bowmen. Also keeping the spells weaker, and less random would be better, or perhaps with shorter ranges.


I would like to see Large Targets get some sort of ward save vs shooting attacks. Maybe even some sort of save kinda like the Bretonians blessing of the bearded lady. Currently, Giants, Griffons, ect are too vulnerable.

Why not simply give these monsters an armour save vs. shooting thanks to their thick hides. It could be given ad hoc to those units that need it rather than the already nasty ones that have been coming out lately.


-Make hand weapon/shield bonus work against infantry only.

Why? Its not as though cavalry and monsters have too much problem with HW+S. In truth, its infantry that need the bonus removed the most, so spearmen and Halberds don't have to be overshadowed as much.


-Pole-Arms (spears, pikes, halberds etc.) are armour piercing against cavalry.

Pikes I can see, but there aren't that many in the game right now. Halberds should be better, but not exclusively against cavalry as they were good anti-infantry weapons too. Spears, just no. The typical warhammer spear is short thrusting weapons and shouldn't be compared to longspears and pikes.


-Mounted bonus works only in CC, Barding only against shooting.

Why? It doesn't make any logical sense.

soots
12-11-2009, 03:37
I think what a lot of people are asking is far too complex.

As for recommendations

- ASF is fine. High elves ALL with ASF isnt (stupid idea).
- Definately need to overhaul magic. Thats the agreed gripe from everyone. Dumb it down and make it less ALL or NOTHING.
- Army balance. Its totally out of whack.
- Some extra bonus for more infantry. Perhaps extra attacks.
- Weapon bonuses need a review.

Einholt
12-11-2009, 03:59
I think flight being dropped to 15 inches might also help, in forcing people to wield flyers more skillfully.

ChaosVC
12-11-2009, 04:24
The fastest land "animal" in Warhammer world can march up to 20".

Hakkapelli
12-11-2009, 18:33
-Make hand weapon/shield bonus work against infantry only.


Why? Its not as though cavalry and monsters have too much problem with HW+S. In truth, its infantry that need the bonus removed the most, so spearmen and Halberds don't have to be overshadowed as much.

To give infantry a reason to use the weapons that are supposed to be good against cavalry, instead of hand weapon/shield to avoid giving the cavalry a good combat resolution. IMO swordsmen are supposed to be good against infantry but suffer against cavalry.

-Pole-Arms (spears, pikes, halberds etc.) are armour piercing against cavalry.


Pikes I can see, but there aren't that many in the game right now. Halberds should be better, but not exclusively against cavalry as they were good anti-infantry weapons too. Spears, just no. The typical warhammer spear is short thrusting weapons and shouldn't be compared to longspears and pikes.

Even a short spear gives you a longer reach and so a bit of a boost against someone who claims +1 save for being higher up. Halberds already have a bonus against infantry, I'm not sure anything else is needed. The Empire Halberdier needs a boost but that have been debated in circles already.

-Mounted bonus works only in CC, Barding only against shooting.


Why? It doesn't make any logical sense.
Fluff reason:Because a shot that kills the horse will most likely put the rider out of action as well. Either he's stuck under it and crushed or he's all alone on a battlefield. In short, he is unlikely to have any impact on the rest of the battle.
In CC on the other hand the attacks are directed against the rider who gains +1 save since it's harder to hit him on horseback. The amount of armour on the horse is no good then since it is not on the right being.

In game reason:I wanted to keep the mounted bonus to make medium cavalry as well protected in CC as the heavy but likelier to die from shooting. However I did not want everyone and his uncle to have a 2+ or 1+ save. This together with not being able to march with barding and armour piercing pole arms would boost infantry vs cavalry and make medium cav something else then the worst of light and heavy cav.

TroyJPerez
12-11-2009, 18:45
I always thought they should get rid of guess weapons. Stone throwers and cannons should just pick a spot on the table or model that they wanna hit and roll the scatter or artillery die.

By the way I like the challenge system, but think that large monsters that are mounts should not be allowed to be in a challenge. They should be open to attack from everyone in the unit that they are fighting that is in base to base. And in turn should be allowed to fight in the challenge or against the unit.

R Man
12-11-2009, 20:22
To give infantry a reason to use the weapons that are supposed to be good against cavalry, instead of hand weapon/shield to avoid giving the cavalry a good combat resolution. IMO swordsmen are supposed to be good against infantry but suffer against cavalry.

All it will do is make killing infantry generally easier. The reason no one takes these weapons is because cav. and monsters just slaughter them.


Even a short spear gives you a longer reach and so a bit of a boost against someone who claims +1 save for being higher up. Halberds already have a bonus against infantry, I'm not sure anything else is needed. The Empire Halberdier needs a boost but that have been debated in circles already.

How does longer reach = Armour Piercing? Maybe a change in initiative or something, but not Armour Piercing.


Fluff reason:Because a shot that kills the horse will most likely put the rider out of action as well. Either he's stuck under it and crushed or he's all alone on a battlefield. In short, he is unlikely to have any impact on the rest of the battle.
In CC on the other hand the attacks are directed against the rider who gains +1 save since it's harder to hit him on horseback. The amount of armour on the horse is no good then since it is not on the right being.

So? Barding would still be useful in combat as soldiers definatley strike the horse. The requirement to strike the rider represents the skill of the cavlaryman to move and fight on his horse and mechanically for simplicity sake.


In game reason:I wanted to keep the mounted bonus to make medium cavalry as well protected in CC as the heavy but likelier to die from shooting. However I did not want everyone and his uncle to have a 2+ or 1+ save. This together with not being able to march with barding and armour piercing pole arms would boost infantry vs cavalry and make medium cav something else then the worst of light and heavy cav.

Cannons, Handguns, Crossbows (to a lesser extent), bolt throwers and many magic missiles are all capable of doing a fair amount of damage to knights. Infact bows are about the only weapons who can't. Here's a better idea, introduce or modify some units into medium cavalry. Silver Helms might be a good candidate. Possibly even Knights errant too. Your changes also have the nasty side effect of making most light cavalry (who aren't really well armoured to begin with) very frail. Sometimes a few unit changes are better than wide sweeping ones.

taucommander45
12-11-2009, 20:26
Make certain things like steam tank, plague furnace and other non-alive models have an armor value just like in 40K. Low strength attacks have zero chance of hurting something made of metal/wood/etc. That's one thing that I think 40K got right.

Be able to buy magic spells after you pick a lore. This way you have exactly what you want but you just have to pay for it.

Be able to charge units that aren't visible (don't blast me yet, keep reading). For example, if there is an enemy unit only 2" away on your flank, it doesn't make sense for that unit to say "I'm marched blocked by it so I know it's there but I can't see it so I can't attack it". Maybe have it so that if an enemy unit in the flank or rear is less than initiative distance away, then the unit is allowed to reform and charge but only at 1X movement rate, not double. This way it's not too powerful but at least a little more realistic and prevents lone characters from flying straight into the middle of an enemy army.

Agree with all the discussion about spears, pikes, etc gaining more of a bonus in terms of raising initiative or striking first.

And last main wishlist item: have a living FAQ page where GW answers questions as they come rather than only periodically.

warhawk95
12-11-2009, 22:30
Make certain things like steam tank, plague furnace and other non-alive models have an armor value just like in 40K. Low strength attacks have zero chance of hurting something made of metal/wood/etc. That's one thing that I think 40K got right.



This why we have toughness. And anykind of extra save on these things would only make them more popular, we dont need more Stanks and furnaces or bells we need more troops.

Green Feevah!
13-11-2009, 01:23
I'd like to see a 'set for charge' option for spears and pikes that gives them ASF against cavalry but they lose their shield bonus for armor. Against infantry spears work fine, but having a long pointy stick should mean something against cavalry in this game.

A volley option for bows would be nice. Something like an unit fires like a stone thrower at a model count of 10, and a large blast template if numbering 20. Have it scatter as normal, and -1 str to make up for not having to roll to hit. Arrows blotting out the sun and all that. Plus it'd be something to make bows a little bit more attractive compared to a black powder weapon.

Speaking of which, black powder weapons should not have armor piercing at long range. They just weren't that accurate. Str 4 at long range is still really good.

And cannons should have to scatter your projected landing point. There is NO WAY a cannonball could hit a single soldier on the other side of the battlefield except by sheer luck. Probably only a D3" scatter, but still scatter. then draw a line from the scattered impact point to the cannon to determine the direction of the bounce.

Clearer terrain rules. There should be advantages/disadvanatges for being in and out of terrain. Otherwise all terrain should just be impassible. Difficult terrain should not hold up a unit for half the game while they figure out how to move through a couple of trees.

Outnumbering should matter more than it does. +1 for outnumber, +2 for double, +3 for triple, etc... A hundred night goblins should be able to drag down 10 chaos warriors. Yes they suck at fighting, but when they are hanging on to your every limb, you will get dragged down to their level. Then they eat you.

Degrees of fear. I do not think that an Ogre and a zombie are equally scary. Shambling zombie, fear test at +1 or 2 to Ld. Ogre, straight up fear test. Bloodcrusher, Fear test at -1 or 2. Plus you could modify that test by unit size. 1 human will be afraid of 1 zombie.... 20 humans will stomp it to death without pausing.

I for one, wouldn't mind them adding more rules and modifers. I don't want to see fantasy 'dumbed down'. I also think that you can add modiefiers and rules easily as long as you present them clearly. Which to this day has been GW's biggest challenge.

Tzeentch Loyalist
01-12-2009, 16:34
I would like to see Rank bonus based on base size.
20mm base = 5 models to get rank bonus
25mm (including cavalry) = 4 models
40mm & 50mm = 3 models

This helps ogre kingdom players by being able to have access to rank bonuses and might make the army a little bit viable.

Or maybe keep it at 5 models for 20mm and 25mm bases, but allow 40mm and 50mm bases to have a rank at 3 models. any thoughts?

Aceski
01-12-2009, 23:06
This is a great discussion that I've had with my fellow gamers and it has only become more heated lately as the rumors persist. Some things we agreed would be neat changes had to deal with movement, magic system, and some small tweaks to the rules that are a little much. Some times all it takes is just taking an existing rule and writing it to make more clear sense.

So here we go:

Movement:

- agreed the clipping needs to change, and I like the "free slide" that works like the free wheel. Of course this has to be within reason, and so long as there is the space to do so.

- Suggested that there be a rule change to difficult terrian, something like: you may not march, instead of no march and half move.. You should not be penalized for overrunning into a forest and then sitting there for 3+ turns (maybe the whole game if your a dwarf). Regular move is slow enough for difficult terrain.

- Would like to see some of the machanics from warmaster (take a test with certain penalties to allow for an extra move or wheel, or reform). Sort of battle orders, first one requires a LD test -1, then -2, and so on.. until you fail. Would really give fantasy the freedom for some exceptional strategy, and as well would make playing scenic games with lots of scenery playable.

- Agree with having some more realistic cavalry rules, were both units recieve some bonus on the charge, opposing cavalry even if caught off gaurd would counter in some form. Perhaps they get to strike with impact hits too all be it last. Could also make Cav Vs Cav not result in such stale mates due to armour saves.

Magic:

- Agree with a system where by your mage can choose spells dependant on their wizard level, so lv 1 only knows 1-2 spells, lv 2 knows 3, lv 3 knows 5, and lv 4 knows them all from a lore. It is acceptable that your lv 4 should have access to the best spells, and not getting stuck with the 4 spells you don't need considering how many points you've spent on them.

- Agree with the use dispell scroll, roll a 1 it does not work, but make it 20pts. Perhaps eliminate the IR and MC.. They do add great randomness to games its true, but they also break the game with the recent army books and various items floating around these days. Your wizard failing to cast is bad enough, perhaps add mishaps or bonuses to individual spells much like Wotr or other minature games do.

- Making the scroll enchanted is a great way to add magic defense without littering your army with scroll caddies, as well as null stones? (10-15pts for a dispell dice - one use only - enchanted..)

Shooting:

- Archers should be able to shoot in a ranked formation with a modifier, it would make most realistic sense. Why 20 archers lined in 2 rows can't unload 20 shots is rediculous.. And you already take enough penalties especially if your shooting at scirmishers, single chars, or wood elves.. -1 is enough..

- No partials, if the template touches it, it should be hit, and the hole should be the only thing that designates the D6-D3 wounds..

- Take Aim? - some sort of drill order that lets you sacrifice a turn to get re-rolls, or no modifiers the next time you shoot?.. kinda neat if anything else.

Close Combat:

- Combat Res, Agree with giving added bonus to outnumbering by 2,3, or 4 to 1.. have to be careful here as it could break vamps or certain ITP even worse.. But I think it could work for some units for sure.

- Clarificartion of some rules regarding challenges, and character placements..

- I generally feel combat is okay, its just the rules that govern how to get into combat that need fixing..As well as who gets to fight, and in which order..

Other notes: Need to fix character + mount, and odd base sized US,
and min 5 US to march block for sure.

- I like the idea of a 7 turn game, I think it is fair there are quite a few games that could have gone from a tie to a win with one more turn.. 6 turns is fine too.. maybe 7 for some scenarios.

Flash Felix
01-12-2009, 23:53
A few extra ideas;

Counter-charge: A charge reaction, it allows the charged unit to charge it's attackers if charged from the front. The charging unit would get any charge modifiers (like lance or impact hits). Who strikes first is debateable: it could be the charger (as it is at present), it could be based on Initiative, or (my favourite) it could be simultaneous...... OK, not popular, and arguably reduces the scope for tactics, but it would result in a real bloodbath, with everyone striking. It's historically more accurate, as units charging each other normally lost their first couple of ranks. But if that's too much of a leap, keep it as charger strikes first. Cavalry can do this, I'd let infantry only counter-charge other infantry.

Hold Charge Reaction: Units electing to hold if charged from the front may get an Armour Save bonus, to represent a closing of ranks and preperation to receive a charge. Maybe infantry only, even +1 A/S is good for them.

Second Rank Can Strike: At the moment, units losing their front rank lose their ability to fight back. If more than 5 models are killed, they'll lose a chunk of their second rank too. So models in the second rank have enough time to be attacked and killed, but not to fight back. This makes no sense to me. I propose that once casualties are removed, any figures moved up into the fighting ranks (including 2nd with spears) get to make attacks as normal. This will be a bonus to units with multiple ranks, as they can absorb casualties and still fight back. It would be a moderate boost to ranked infantry, who need it at present.

Disciplined Special Rule: To represent the advanced training of some armies, I'd like to see a Special Rule in the BRB, that allows units to move more rapidly. Maybe a free reform at the start of the turn, possibly subject to a Ld test. I'd also like a modifier to Panic tests, particularly for troops retiring through their ranks (think of Roman skirmishers withdrawing on command through the legions, as the enemy charges). This would give Dwarves, High Elves, Empire State Troops and other well-drilled troops more of an edge over others, in a way that doesn't emphasise raw power.

Rank Breaking: US5 means that any monster can break ranks with a flank charge. If this became US8 or 10, it would mean that only other ranked units, large cavalry units or very large monsters (like Stegadons) would strip this bonus from ranked infantry. Again, this would be another boost to ranked infantry, and help protect them against the flying monsters who seem to reign supreme at present.


Things that should stay:

S7 Chariot killing: Chariots are pretty fragile things, not because of the chariot itself, but because of the animals pulling it. They don't even have to be killed, simply making one of them lame will render your chariot next to useless. Killing even one will effectively destroy your chariot, as it now not only lacks the horsepower to pull the vehicle (literally), there's a dirty great dead horse/cold one/white lion etc, to be dragged. So keep S7, it's an elegant way of saying chariots are vulnerable. Otherwise, allow opponents to target the animals, which is what made chariots vulnerable in the first place.

Partial Hits on 4+: I play Dwarves, so I should really like the idea of all models being auto-hit. I don't because this would make ranked infantry even more unworkable. Dragons, Hydras, magic and war machines would further push ranked units into endangered species territory. Give them a break man...

RichBlake
02-12-2009, 04:17
Well in temrs of shooting let me explain my experience of fantasy:

I play an Empire gunline. 2 Steam tanks, a cannon, a mortar, 60 handgunners, 10 pistoliers, 15 halbardiers (they sit at the back babysitting the general and BSB and scroll caddy).

Let me tell you this: Those handgunners very rarely do anywhere near as much damage as any given melee unit can do. I have two squads of 20 handgunners (2 ranks of 10) and one 20 man squad has two detachments of 10 handgunners. Seriously ten shots at BS3 aren't going to do more then 3/4 casualties a turn, but when a melee unit DOES get there the unit gets minced.

There's only been one army I played against that the handgunners decimated and that was an empire melee army, simply because T3 + rubbish saves + low leadership = bad times. Mainly in my army the steam tanks and the artillery do the heavy work and the handgunners simply mop up.

Me and my mates were talking about it but we weren't sure how to implement a firing in ranks system. They all agree it'd make sense for empire to be able to fire handguns in ranks, but then again armies (especially elves) firing bows in ranks makes sense too. However dwarves firing in ranks with handguns makes no sense, they wouldnt be able to stand back up after kneeling.

So we came up with a rule that says bowmen can fire in ranks starting at their normal BS and deducting 1 from their ballistic skill for every rank. So BS4 bowmen can effectively fire in 4 ranks. However a squad of 40 bowmen would, at best, be hitting on 3's, then 4's, then 5's, then 6's. This couldn't be used for Stand & Shoot though as it takes time and a cool head to perform this sort of volley of fire and the enemy is closing down on your far too fast at that point.

The balancing factor of this is if you pay even 40 points for each of those ranks the last two ranks would probably be better off in seperate squads anyway and since you can't do it for Stand & Shoot it probably makes little difference.

Then Empire Handgunners would simply have a special rule allowing them to fire in ranks.

Also as someone who is relatively new to Fantasy, why would it be surprising if shooting became, as a general rule, better then close combat? That's what _happens_ when you invent black powder weapons. Pointing a stick and pulling a trigger to kill a knight is much easier then trying to drag him off his horse and jab a dagger in his face.

Alathir
02-12-2009, 09:34
My gaming group has recently been trying out some changes to the game that have all worked really well actually, I think they should definitely find their way into 8th edition. They are as follows..

Dispel Scrolls are 20 points across the board. They no longer cancel a spell completely but rather allow the defending player to remove the two highest dice from the casting roll, if the spell is still cast then they can attempt once more with their normal dice. We like this because in alot of cases the spell is simply stopped but when a caster really tries to get a crucial spell off and risks using say 5 dice, their efforts aren't just immediately trumped. In reference to items like Spell-eater type items (spell destroyed on a 4+) they still immediately cancel a spell like the current dispel scroll and provide a chance to destroy the spell entirely, which all of sudden makes this items quite attractive.

The second being, and this was suggested by a poster on Warseer, that being beaten in combat by an outnumbering fear causing enemy no longer results in being 'autobroken' but rather the negative modifier for the beaten unit's leadership is simply doubled. So having an unlucky round of combat and being beaten by skeletons by one no longer dooms your prized unit. Against stubborn troops, the modifier simply isn't doubled but they no longer count as stubborn essentially.

Chiron
02-12-2009, 10:36
Striking in initative order, chargers double initative on the charge while spears and pikes cancel this out against cavalry (counts as defended obstacle) to the front


However dwarves firing in ranks with handguns makes no sense, they wouldnt be able to stand back up after kneeling.

Erm... what the hell?

Zilverug
02-12-2009, 13:53
Dispel scrolls no longer auto shut down spell. Instead they work like power stones. You get to add 2 dice to a dispel attempt. As an added bonus you can reroll 1's generated by the bonus dice one.


Ok!



Pool power dice generation made random, generating a D3 dice each magic phase. (This is more a backstory thing as the winds of magic are fickle.)


There is currently a problem with armies that only bring a single wizard: they do not get many spells casted. When the pool only contains a single power die, they will be even worse off. Magic heavy armies probably wouldn't be affected too much by this change. I do not think it's a good idea.



Level 4 wizards may choose to exchange one spell rolled for ANY spell of the lore, not just the first.


Level 3 wizards as well?
Or maybe exchange for the first N spells where N is the level of the wizard.



+1 to dispel any spell cast on a single dice.


No - armies containing a single wizard casting on a single dice do not cause problems and should actually be encouraged - unless they are just scroll caddies, of course.

Maybe casting the same spell multiple times in a single magic phase should add +1 on its minimum casting value each time.



8 lores from the main book get a bit of a boost.


Some are a bit boring and some spells are quite bad, but in general the power level is much better than the 6th edition lores.



Cavalry cause a single impact hit at the strength of their mount on the turn they charge. (losing their normal mount attack)


What does this fix? It would make boar boys sad. It's easier to keep it as it is.



S7 no longer blows chariots to hell.


This is what (almost) everyone is waiting for!



Ranked infantry armed with spears, shields and hand weapons may allow the front rank to fight with shield/hand weapon while the back rank attacks with spears.


No thanks - Elf warriors are fine as they are.



Daemonic Ward Saves bypassed by magical attacks (booyeah!)


No, this is a army book specific rule.

And it would mainly penalize the "balanced" daemon lists (pure Slaanesh/Nurgle), while the most "broken" gods either generate millions of dispel dice (Tzeentch) of have magic resistance (Khorne).



'Clipping' officially resolved.


That would be about time...



Unbreakable units who lose combat strike last in the next combat phase (too much?)


That would make Dwarf Slayers even worse than they are. It seems that you are trying to "fix" some unbalanced army books with a general rule - not a good idea.



ASF for 1st round of combat only? (Like Hatred basically)


Giving a complete army ASF was quite a bad idea, but don't fix it in the general rules.

In Mordheim spears have ASF in the first round of combat only (but no fighting in ranks - mainly because there are no ranked fighting in Mordheim).
The current Warhammer rule is probably better for Warhammer spears, but ASF in the first round of combat would be a nice weapon rule (pikes?).

DarkTerror
02-12-2009, 15:52
Well in temrs of shooting let me explain my experience of fantasy:

I play an Empire gunline. 2 Steam tanks, a cannon, a mortar, 60 handgunners, 10 pistoliers, 15 halbardiers (they sit at the back babysitting the general and BSB and scroll caddy).

Let me tell you this: Those handgunners very rarely do anywhere near as much damage as any given melee unit can do. I have two squads of 20 handgunners (2 ranks of 10) and one 20 man squad has two detachments of 10 handgunners. Seriously ten shots at BS3 aren't going to do more then 3/4 casualties a turn, but when a melee unit DOES get there the unit gets minced.

There's only been one army I played against that the handgunners decimated and that was an empire melee army, simply because T3 + rubbish saves + low leadership = bad times. Mainly in my army the steam tanks and the artillery do the heavy work and the handgunners simply mop up.

Me and my mates were talking about it but we weren't sure how to implement a firing in ranks system. They all agree it'd make sense for empire to be able to fire handguns in ranks, but then again armies (especially elves) firing bows in ranks makes sense too. However dwarves firing in ranks with handguns makes no sense, they wouldnt be able to stand back up after kneeling.

So we came up with a rule that says bowmen can fire in ranks starting at their normal BS and deducting 1 from their ballistic skill for every rank. So BS4 bowmen can effectively fire in 4 ranks. However a squad of 40 bowmen would, at best, be hitting on 3's, then 4's, then 5's, then 6's. This couldn't be used for Stand & Shoot though as it takes time and a cool head to perform this sort of volley of fire and the enemy is closing down on your far too fast at that point.

The balancing factor of this is if you pay even 40 points for each of those ranks the last two ranks would probably be better off in seperate squads anyway and since you can't do it for Stand & Shoot it probably makes little difference.

Then Empire Handgunners would simply have a special rule allowing them to fire in ranks.

Also as someone who is relatively new to Fantasy, why would it be surprising if shooting became, as a general rule, better then close combat? That's what _happens_ when you invent black powder weapons. Pointing a stick and pulling a trigger to kill a knight is much easier then trying to drag him off his horse and jab a dagger in his face.

I disagree with everything you have to say. Except of course you admitting that you're new to the game.

#1) You're playing a gunline army. The universally hated type of army to play against. Roll dice and move some models. Warhammer is not 40k, FoW, or modern shooting game.

#2) Gunlines should not be made better. See #1

#3) Shooting will never (and shouldn't) become more powerful than combat. The game revolves around movement and combat, with shooting adding a tweak to the game just as magic. See #1

#4) Handgunners fire in ranks as well as bows? No.

willowdark
02-12-2009, 16:02
A while ago, in a different thread, I made this suggestion. I'd like to elaborate on it a bit.

I'd like to see a rule where Cavalry suffers reverse impact hits for charging spear or halberd armed infantry to the front. Something like D6 hits at the base strength of the unit as long as its formation is 5 models wide. Also, there should be an addition -1 armour save modifier to the hits for every additional rank beyond the first, to a maximum of -3. This would not apply to infantry which is currently engaged in combat at the time of the charge.

I would also like to see all Longbows treated like wood elf longbows; st4 at close range and no move and shoot penalty. WE Longbows should be armour piercing at short range as well. I think this would go along way to reestablishing the Longbow as the traditional anti-cav ranged attack, especially for armies like Bretonnia and Empire.

Both of these rules would help infantry to retain its value against the proliferation of heavy cav.

Idle Scholar
02-12-2009, 16:08
The problem with any shooting buff is that current shooting already verges on overpowering close combat. Ideally we need something akin to pinning, so that shooting can be less good at killing, but made more disruptive for those armies that need it. See my earlier suggestion about a disordered state which is fairly standard wargame rules fare.

GenerationTerrorist
07-12-2009, 23:33
Apologies if this counts as bumping a thread back up to the top, but I did not see it originally! Here are my few ideas for 8th Edition:

- Similar kind of Save system to 40K, where you can choose between either a Armour, Ward or Regeneration save. You can only choose one, however.

- Wizards/Mages/Sorcerers allowed to take magic armour....FFS, if a dude is messing around with magic and thusly can't wear metal, then how is it possible to make a suit of magic armour in the first place? May be a bit too simplistic, but hopefully you get the idea.

- The 8 Lores of magic be strengthened in some way, and each be split into two sets of 3 spells - The first 3 spells are the only ones available to Hero level Wizards, whilst all 6 are available to Lord level Wizards who can swap any spell for the 4th one in the Lore.

- Missile troops able to fire in 2 ranks. If troops in the real-world Middle Ages were able to do it, then I don't see why Elves and the like are not able to fire arrows without skewering the back of their buddies heads.

- Magic weapons cancel out Ward saves.

- Make it worthwhile to once again take unit Champions as more than mere fodder to save your Lvl4 Mage having to face a challenge. Maybe by making units with a Champion counting as Stubborn? As well as giving an additional +1 to Combat resolution if the unit has Full Command.

- Basic Dispel Dice generated in exactly the same quantity as Power Dice. This would stop Magic-Reliant armies dominating as they currently seem to do. Dispel Scrolls adding 2D6 (as mentioned previously) to a Dispel attempt - But a Double 1 rolled (by any of the Dice) causes the spell to be cast with Irresistable Force and able to be cast again that same phase, whilst a Double 6 makes that spell unusable for the next turn. Also re-introduce the old "Destroy Magic" scrolls, or whatever they were called, that automatically ended the Magic Phase and killed all Remain In Play spells, cost them at 50pts each.

- Chariots able to march, please.

- Cavalry/Mounted units and characters lose their +1 Save bonus in return for a single Impact hit at the strength of their mount on the turn they charge. If the Mount is barded, this Impact hit gets a +1 strength bonus. This should de-power, slightly, the current strength of Cavalry in the game, and ensure that they are more vulnerable to missile fire (no more 1+ basic saves!), but make them more dangerous on the charge like they should be. Spears/Lances would also get a similar Impact hit at +1/+2 Strength for the rider. Lets face it, Lances and the like do not really rely on Weapon Skill, but pointing and charging. *Expects to be shot down by Medieval Recreationist Society of Warseer*

- Missile fire that rolls a 6 to hit counts as having hit a vulnerable part on the enemy, and is resolved at +1 Strength and an additional -1 (on top of the Strength bonus) to Saves.

- Bring back the old "Surrounding" rule as a possibility in the following turn for units that win a single unit-on-unit combat, fail to break the enemy, but outnumber in terms of US. This would negate all Rank Bonuses in the combat, but cause a +D6 Combat Resolution modifier in favour of the attacker. Attacking units that are then counter-charged in the surrounding flank would lose this bonus and suffer a -1 modifier....Representing the "Defeat snatched from the jaws of victory" scenario, and cause people to be more careful about exposing their flanks like this or throwing caution to the wind. Frenzied units would be compelled to try to surround.

I'll grab my fire extinguisher and wait for the inferno after my crap suggestions!
:-)

ooglatjama
07-12-2009, 23:58
I've always thought there should be only one wizard per lord slot and one per hero (to represent an apprentice), I also think it would be cool if there were 4 teirs of a spell, and each teir had 3 spells and you could pick one from each teir based on level (level two gets 1 level one and 1 level two). Shouldn't wizards who studied longer have access to spells little whelp wizards haven't even dreamed about instead of just four common spells any idiot can cast.

Solar_Eclipse
08-12-2009, 01:33
Make Magic cause different effects rather than just killing the enemy.

Some spells do this, but things like magic missiles should be much rarer.

soots
08-12-2009, 01:45
Selectable spells - We can customize everything in our army, surely wizards would have studied the correct spells in their training.

Sure winds of magic can fluctuate, but wizards reading random pages in spell books?

Of course, magic system needs overhaul too :)

Also like to see more weapon bonuses and more bonuses for numbers.

Ronin_eX
08-12-2009, 02:43
I'd love to see:

- More options in the form of orders a Hero/Lord/Champion can give out to a unit. Set for charge, shield wall formation and various others would be great and would give the game and player more tactical flexibility.

- Linked to the above more command and control in general. Make the army general more than a Ld boost. Create some kind of order system to replace the dated phase system and maybe introduce some kind of resource management system based around the command system (or even a risk vs. reward system like in Epic and Warmaster).

- Deepen the morale mechanics with options seen in WAB. Things that make breaking less binary would be great. Possibly staged morale where confidence goes through multiple levels before reaching 'broken' with each level carrying different consequences. This would give another axis other than leadership to represent good training/morale which would help make things less binary.

- Linked to the above would be magic that effects morale/confidence in more varied ways. Variety is the spice of gaming afterall.

- Balance! GW needs to spend the time and come out with a point cost rubric. After that they can tweak point values to make things feel "right" but without a common starting point all they are doing is tweaking an arbitrary point value which leads to problems when they develop armies in a vacuum (as they always do). Before making a single army they should have a system, a philosophy and checks and balances in place to make sure designers stick to it. What they do now doesn't work and leads to massive power disparities in armies which isn't fun even if you play for fun. With all that in place they can now quickly develop lists for all the armies and test them more effectively. There will be no mid-edition shift of philosophy. If they design it right in the first place they wont need to constantly shift goal posts with each release. This last bit would also be nice for 40k 6th Edition but after three editions of waiting I'm no longer holding my breath for that one.

- Last and least likely change the system to a D10 base (because for a 1-10 stat level variation this, you know, makes sense) and get rid of armour save as a stat. Infantry now has only a toughness stat. Large creatures, some magic items and the most heavily armoured troops will gain a save as a special rule instead of as standard. Armour save modifiers will only be seen on very strong monsters, some magic items and artillery. Due to the rarity there will be no more items that outright disallow and armour save except in narrow circumstances (such as a unit only getting a save against attacks that, for instance, do not deal flaming damage to represent regeneration). This will of course call for a massive overhaul but most GW games need one of those at this cycle.

Green Feevah!
08-12-2009, 10:58
I really like a lot of these suggestions! We can only hope and pray the book monkeys at GW are reading.

What about a magic system where your level 1 mage knows the first three spells, level 2 four, level three five and level knows all 6 spells? Then put a harder cap on spellcasting, but now you have the flexibility of not having to roll for spells. Make all spells cast on minimum 2 dice. A level one gets 2 dice to spend (but can cast any spell he knows), a level two gets 2 dice with a +2 bonus. Level three gets 3 Dice, and level 4 gets 3 dice +2. The only spell this would hurt would be the new Skaven spell, but that'd be a case for power stones.

Definitely agreed that dispel scroll need to lose their 'all or nothing' effect. I like the 'knocks off the 2 highest dice'. Guaranteed to knock out low level spells, and high level magic still has a chance.

Most importantly though, I agree that basic rank infantry needs a big boost. It's why I got into Fantasy. If I wanted to just throw a couple of big models on the field that can rip apart entire units, I'd play 40k.

I'd love to see spears get a big buff against cavalry. I'd also love to see ranked infantry mean more. Having a static +5 CR means nothing when your enemy has 20 attacks (*cough* lizards *cough*). Also the recent prevalence of STR 5 troops (and of course multiple attack cavalry) makes armor as a statistic almost worthless. Why pay 2 points a model (LA/Shield) when those 2 points are almost automatically negated? Either move up armor penetration to start at STR 5 or write books (like Orcs) with the armor baked in. The extra point paid for shields is negated by almost every army out there now.

I also totally agree with the idea of a base of measurement for points costs. STR 3 should cost X. STR 4 costs Y. Standard across all armies. Special rule A costs Z. Then build your armybooks, knowing that it's a solid formula that worked out the points cost of your unit, instead of a writer that may or may not even like your army (I'm looking at you Matt Ward!)

Limenix
08-12-2009, 13:03
So far i really liked the "counter-charge" rule by FELIX and the D3 power dice per round rule.
+1 to the "shaken" ruke too.

I would like to see ...

1)Allow units that win a combat when charged in the flank to make a free reform move and face the enemy full frontal the next turn.

2)Cavalary units should only get charge bonuses when charging from over
half theyr MV.Fluff wise if charging from too close , the riders cant get theyr lances ready to strike or they havent build up enough momentum for the lance to hit full strenght.

3)Flyers shoulf have max 15' MV.

4)Roll a D6 for a random scenario.This would force players to build more all around army lists , especially if there are scenarios that have -2 for spells or shooting ;)

5)Cannons should only to D3 wounds.Ok maybe D3+1.

6)Enhance rules to make charging easier.The game is all about cc.(or should be)
Give units 180' line of sight instead of 90'.
Make sliding/cliping in some way legal.
If one unit touches one other just bring them in full frontal position.

7)Maybe allow units to make a reform move before moving (for half theyr MV) and then allow them to move the rest.
This should help avoid situations when units get stuck.
Basically allow for easier movement on the table.

Chiron
08-12-2009, 13:09
5)Cannons should only to D3 wounds.Ok maybe D3+1.

Cannons do do D3 wounds, its only Empire cannons that do d6 wounds :D

Green Feevah!
08-12-2009, 17:18
4)Roll a D6 for a random scenario.This would force players to build more all around army lists , especially if there are scenarios that have -2 for spells or shooting ;)

This. I couldn't agree more. If we take the'line up and kill each other' out of the game, some of the current power builds might not be so power afterall.

Especally if it's things like core troops over a certain US that count as sdcoring. Power to the Core troops!

stashman
08-12-2009, 17:37
I would also get rid of the strikes last penalty for Great Weapons. Replace it with a -1 or -2 I penalty, give Spears a +2I bonus and Halberds +1.


GREAT! I like this!

Makes spear a bit more useful for some armies.