PDA

View Full Version : Am I playing wrong?



Galadrin
08-02-2006, 12:50
It has just occured to me while reading some other threads that I (and my group) may be playing Warhammer incorrectly. For instance, with chargers, during the move chargers phase, we just measure from the front middle of the charging unit to the target unit. If this is in range, then we push up the charger into the target (unless there are flee reactions etc). Do you have to wheel etc, costing you movement to make a charge?

We also say that you have to charge the closest target in a 90 degree charge arc (we allow skirmishers to aim the charge arc in any way they want as long as the center is pointing at the intended target of the charge), unless there is an enemy that is further horizontally from the target than it is vertically (that is, if the front unit is 14 inches away, but there is another unit 6 inches off to the side and 3 inches back, you can charge the second unit because 6>3).

I don't have the rulebook on me because I'm at school, so can anyone help me on this?

Atrahasis
08-02-2006, 12:59
Yes, you are wrong.

I cannot see how on earth you could come to the above system from reading the rulebook.

Gorbad Ironclaw
08-02-2006, 13:25
Me neither really. I don't think any of that is supported in any way in the rulebook.


Your free to charge any unit you like, as long as you got the movement/room to reach it.

And a charge move follows all the normal movement rules, so you pay movement to wheel(one wheel only!), difficult terrain etc.

mageith
08-02-2006, 13:45
For instance, with chargers, during the move chargers phase, we just measure from the front middle of the charging unit to the target unit. If this is in range, then we push up the charger into the target (unless there are flee reactions etc).

I'll bet your games go faster. We played that way for a while as house rule. Most everyone liked it. But we decided to go back to the slower more tedious rules of the BRB because some of the players wanted to play in tournaments and the house rule impaired their ability to estimate charges.





We also say that you have to charge the closest target in a 90 degree charge arc

This is an intuitive way to play, IMO, but is not required.



(we allow skirmishers to aim the charge arc in any way they want as long as the center is pointing at the intended target of the charge), unless there is an enemy that is further horizontally from the target than it is vertically (that is, if the front unit is 14 inches away, but there is another unit 6 inches off to the side and 3 inches back, you can charge the second unit because 6>3).

I didn't really follow this (How can a center point?), but the intuitive way wouldn't work well the skirmishers as it might result in them charging backwards when they didn't want to.



I don't have the rulebook on me because I'm at school, so can anyone help me on this?
I have played so many folks who were taught to play by someone else who have so many strange, weird and/or wonderful ways to play this game. As long as you stick to your group, who cares. But if you venture out into the world, it's time to read the book more carefully.

Good luck

Mage Ith

Morph
08-02-2006, 14:40
The measuring charge range from the front of the unit it is a big simplification but I can kind of see where ithe idea would come from if you didn't really read the rules. I'm afraid that you have to be a bit more complicated than that. Chargers move directly forwards with one wheel allowed, none of the models may move more than their charge distance. Only one model has to get into contact with the enemy but you must get the most models in contact that you can. (That's my charging summary for you, but please go and read the rulebook)

Your closest target rule seems incredibly random though. Forget it immediately!

Galadrin
08-02-2006, 15:49
I dunno, I almost find my way a little better (outside of the fact that it is useless in tournament settings). Now I see what "clipping" is, and I think my way doesn't allow for clipping.

What I meant with the skirmishers, is that the attacking player targets an enemy first, then places a 90 degree imaginary template, with the short end on the charging unit, and the target in the middle of the long end (so that there are 45 degrees to each side of the intended target). If there is a closer enemy within 45 degrees to either side of the target, then that target must be charged instead.

This falls also under our ruling of closer target, in that the second enemy must be closer to you than it is close to the first target. You can target an enemy that is 2 inches farther away than another in your charge arc, but only as long as the second is more than 2 inches from the first.

We do, of course, recognize terrain in charges. We also don't allow charges if the charge lane's width is smaller than the unit's width (if it is, for instance, limited by impassible terrain). In fact, I think the only thing we ignore is the one optional wheel in charge (but please check my prior description and make sure I'm not forgetting more), because otherwise, the target must be in charge distance (as normal). I guess we just came to ignore it over time, because when we first learned it, we were learning it in a friendly, light hearted environment.

So is this a bad way to play it? What are the serious disadvantages (other than it is not tournament friendly) or advantages to it? Thanks for all the help so far..

ZomboCom
08-02-2006, 17:45
Having to charge the closest target basically removes 70% of tactics from the game. It's a really really bad idea, don't do it!

Galadrin
08-02-2006, 18:47
Having to charge the closest target basically removes 70% of tactics from the game. It's a really really bad idea, don't do it!

Really?

Why? Doesn't it reinforce defensive formations and clever maneuvers? And doesn't it stop all that foggy "I meant to charge the lone hero to the side of the enemy infantry, but touched the enemy infantry first" stuff?

Gorbad Ironclaw
08-02-2006, 20:18
I don't know if it reinforce clever manoeuvres. I would think it rewards having more units, and cheaper ones, as you can dictate what units the enemy can even charge a whole lot easier. And I would think it makes it a lot easier to protect things like warmachines and things too.

*shrugh* If you like it play with it.


Oh, and I don't think I ever had the "Oh, I charged something else happen" as I don't really see how it would happen. If there isn't room, you can't charge.

Galadrin
08-02-2006, 21:12
So in this example:

http://www.daorsainn.com/example.jpg

You would declare the charge from the Chaos Knights against the lone Gobblin Shaman, then during the move chargers phase, the charge would be an automatic failure, since the Knights couldn't hope to get at the Shaman without first running into a different enemy unit?

mageith
08-02-2006, 21:14
So is this a bad way to play it? What are the serious disadvantages (other than it is not tournament friendly) or advantages to it? Thanks for all the help so far..
Requiring charges to the closest target does reduce choices and so it reduces tactics, but 70% seems high.

As I mentioned, the 'closest target' rule might make units with 360 LOS charge backwards in a most unsatisfactory way. Perhaps your imaginary template fixes that.

Charge range is effectively increased. This probably rewards units with longer charge ranges and wider fronts more proportionately. Mainly this would be cavalry.

Some players are very concerned with limiting the number of models in contact. This can be done by backing up and requiring longer charges or by what's commonly called tactical charging or wheeling beyond what is strictly necessary. This, maybe dubious, tactic would be restricted.

Advantages: Faster play. Fewer questions on maximization since you appear to require maximum maximization regardless of the actual distance moved. Less decision making as the decision is no simply to charge or not to charge. No agonizing over who to charge.

Festus
08-02-2006, 21:16
Hi

... maximum maximization ...
I sooooo love your *termini technici* :angel: :D

Mad Makz
09-02-2006, 00:24
Having to charge the closest enemy unit certainly undermines certain units (Flyers, large target flyers especially, cavalry, chariots etc).

Also, in the example you have given, the charges would fail the charge. This makes a lot of sense in the fact the they thought they were clear of an enemy threat, but the enemy threat was able to get the drop as they were charging past and engaged them (effectively the single character has nipped around the flank of an enemy unit, and suckered your unit to go racing after him, only to be caught pants down by a nearby unit.)

There is a really easy solution to this problem: Don't declare the risky charge against the lone character unless you are sure you can make it, and if you are wrong, live with the consequences.

As it stands, your rule change to charging the closest unit prevents this altogether, so while the simplification may prevent 'odd' situations occurring, it also decreases choice and risk taking, which speeds up the game but all in all I think makes it less tactical and it CERTAINLY decreases the viability of certain units, which means those units are now comparatively overcosted compared to the way were designed to be used.

Morph
09-02-2006, 08:26
Yarrrr, Chaooooss!

All I know is that there should be more tactical examples that look like this.

mageith
09-02-2006, 13:28
Mad Makz: I think you are overstating the direness in general.

Having to charge the closest enemy unit certainly undermines certain units (Flyers, large target flyers especially, cavalry, chariots etc).
Undermines? The units you mention (except for etc.?) are generally good units to begin with. IMO, they can stand a little undermining.


Also, in the example you have given, the charges would fail the charge. This makes a lot of sense in the fact the they thought they were clear of an enemy threat, but the enemy threat was able to get the drop as they were charging past and engaged them (effectively the single character has nipped around the flank of an enemy unit, and suckered your unit to go racing after him, only to be caught pants down by a nearby unit.)

I didn't follow all this, but then I didn't follow the diagram either? Apparently the galadrin is saying the character was the closest target by his measuring rule (center to center). Obviously the measuring rule then needs some work.
1) The center of the Orcs is further back and artificially makes its longer.
2) The measuring rule apparently doesn't take into account the distance moved (but then either does the charging rule).
3) The measuring rule wasn't even followed. "If this is in range, then we push up the charger into the target (unless there are flee reactions etc). Do you have to wheel etc, costing you movement to make a charge?"
4) If the players had applied to reasonability rule (A unit cannot declare a charge it cannot make), then there wouldn't be the required charge.

So the measuring rule needs to take all these things into account as well as some other things or be scrapped. If the player's insist on keeping the rule to charge the closest enemy, then they need to redefine it more precisesly than a straight line (as the crow flies) because most units don't fly.


There is a really easy solution to this problem: Don't declare the risky charge against the lone character unless you are sure you can make it, and if you are wrong, live with the consequences.

Its easy but silly. The Chaos Knights have a target rich environment, but since the rule states they can only charge one and the rule too narrowly defines the closest, they are messed over. The purpose of the closest target rule, IMO, is make things more realistic and in the case it makes it less realistic. The rule is bad.

[b]
As it stands, your rule change to charging the closest unit prevents this altogether, so while the simplification may prevent 'odd' situations occurring, it also decreases choice and risk taking, which speeds up the game but all in all I think makes it less tactical and it CERTAINLY decreases the viability of certain units, which means those units are now comparatively overcosted compared to the way were designed to be used.[/QUOTE]
Again, I'd say, the units you mention are probably in need of adjustments, but I'm not sure you are considering everything. Remember the since the wheeling cost is negated, cavalry now can charge further.

And while offensive tactical choices are reduced, defensive tactics are increased as more traps and ploys can be set up. However, I'm not sure this is a good thing.

So, the point I am trying to make is that the closet target rule needs to be more carefully written. Somehow it needs to take in effect distance traveled. The first thing I'd day is making the measuring rule based on the closest point, not the center point. Second, I'd certainly make an exception if a failed charge is forced.

Mage Ith

Mad Makz
09-02-2006, 18:31
Mage Ith, I was comparing the ACTUAL Rules (which the unit would be unable to charge the mage because the other unit gets in the way) with their house rule (of charging the closest). To me it appeared that the question was 'Isn't it silly by the real rules that this unit would suffer a failed charge because they would inadvertently clip the opposing unit, even though this is not obvious when declaring the charge."

My response to that (assuming that WAS the statement/question outlined by the diagram) is that "Risky charges are part of Warhammer, that's the point."

As for those fast units, denying them the choice of which units to charge undermines their role in the game. Speed in Warhammer is suppossed to give you options, rather than just allow you to get the charge more often than your opponent. If your opponent can easily nullify your options in their turn then the core role of fast moving troops is somewhat undermined.

It doesn't necessarily make them terrible, but it removes a lot of their use from what the designers intended, and makes for a very different game (not necessarily a bad game though, just a different one from that intended.)

Crazy Harborc
09-02-2006, 19:49
It has just occured to me while reading some other threads that I (and my group) may be playing Warhammer incorrectly. For instance, with chargers, during the move chargers phase, we just measure from the front middle of the charging unit to the target unit. If this is in range, then we push up the charger into the target (unless there are flee reactions etc). Do you have to wheel etc, costing you movement to make a charge?

We also say that you have to charge the closest target in a 90 degree charge arc (we allow skirmishers to aim the charge arc in any way they want as long as the center is pointing at the intended target of the charge), unless there is an enemy that is further horizontally from the target than it is vertically (that is, if the front unit is 14 inches away, but there is another unit 6 inches off to the side and 3 inches back, you can charge the second unit because 6>3).

I don't have the rulebook on me because I'm at school, so can anyone help me on this?

As mentioned by others, what you and your opponent(s) have come up with is house rules. be ready to play by the GW version when not playing your current regular opponent(s). "Whatever floats your boat", whatever you and opponents agree to in advance (in writing;) is best) becomes "legal" for you.

Galadrin
09-02-2006, 22:01
Mageith, I think you misunderstood something. My example was about the actual rulebook rule. In that case, the Knights couldn't charge the Shaman, because that charge move would bring them in contact with the Orc Boyz first (notice the corner of the Knights bumps into the Boyz in the diagram). Since the Knights declared the charge against the Shaman, then found out they could not have made it, they don't charge at all (nor would they charge the Boyz, who they would have otherwise bumped into, if I am understanding you guys right).

In my groups rule, a similar result would happen. The Chaos Knights would measure from their center to the closest unit (NOT center to center, just center to target). In this case, the closest unit would clearly be the Orc Boyz in that diagram from sight alone, and thus the Knights could either charge the Boyz, or not charge at all.

I'm a bit confused now though. Some people are saying that this rule makes fast units (cavalry, flyers) too good because it doesn't bother with wheeling, which makes them charge even farther. Others are saying it makes them worse because charging the closest "undermines" them more than others? Which is it then? I'd rather hope it was the one that made them a little worse, since armies that are Cavalry heavy or Flyer heavy are a little too powerful right now.

Also, I want to clarify something, our rule is not as simple as "you must charge the closest in your arc". You can charge units that are further away than the closest, but only if those units are also far away FROM the closest. Also, you don't have to charge a unit that would be closer but is already in combat, just like sticking a unit in combat negates the 5" protection zone for lone characters.

ZomboCom
09-02-2006, 22:08
I'm a bit confused now though. Some people are saying that this rule makes fast units (cavalry, flyers) too good because it doesn't bother with wheeling, which makes them charge even farther. Others are saying it makes them worse because charging the closest "undermines" them more than others? Which is it then? I'd rather hope it was the one that made them a little worse, since armies that are Cavalry heavy or Flyer heavy are a little too powerful right now.


It's both. Sometimes it'll help, other times it won't. Either way, it will reduce the number of choices availible ingame, and that's a bad thing imho, since it turns the game even more into an excercise in throwing dice.

Galadrin
09-02-2006, 22:37
Here is an example of what I meant for how our rule works:

http://www.daorsainn.com/example2.jpg

In the first case, we say the Night Goblins can't be charged, since (just by eyeing it), the Wolf Riders are closest and the Night Goblins are too close to the Wolf Riders (9+1 is not greater than 12", but again we just eye it).

ZomboCom
09-02-2006, 23:41
Sorry, I just can't see the point of this rule of yours. The GW system just works better, and is more tactical. Why shouldn't they be able to charge the goblins if they want to?

renard_sawg
09-02-2006, 23:42
Your house rule is ok, for you and your friends, but not expect to become a competitive player in the near future.

The problem with house rules is that they cannot be adopted by everybody
so whenever you play aganist someone outside your group, you wont be able to play a fun and competitve game.

The problem is that charging only the nearest unit is really diminishing, you can force the enemy to charge in a direction that workes for you, or make him not charge at all because the only options is your strongest or unbrekable unit.

House rules are ok, but when they are in little aspects of the game, or for speciall battles, (for example, removing the 0-1 for some units for one scenario that requieres that, or making some house interpretations for oddities in the game not described by the rule book) but changing in so many way the original structure of playing is not the best idea, is the worst.

Sambojin
11-02-2006, 02:51
One thing I think your rules will do is destroy fast cav as a quick, tactical option. Having to charge the closest unit removes the threat factor of them, and removes the ability to charge huge distances at precisely the target you want, when you want.

For heavy cav it'd be a mixed bag. Sometimes not paying for wheeling would be great (longer charge distance), sometimes worse (easy infantry blocking vs cav, having to charge closest). It also opens up alot of sight/screening options. You no longer have to screen you knights fully, they'll HAVE to charge the closest warhound unit anyway. So your knights can counter-charge more easily (especially with a bit of angling between the two, flank charges are almost assured).

Hehehehehe, I can imagine what long lines of night goblins would do under this system. Bump, splat, bump, splat. Never having to wheel. Hurrah!

Mad Makz
11-02-2006, 08:33
This, I feel, is a fine in house convention for your players, but it's not really a 'rule' because you have to eyeball things and there is not strict 'ruling' about when you can or can't charge anything.

It's actual implications on game play, because of the whole 'only if they are TOO close, whatever that may be' really depends on whether players try and exploit this to their advantage. As it is not defined, it's clear that no one is trying to exploit this, because otherwise you would have had to quickly define the distances. I have a feeling it may actually have relatively little effect on your friendly games compared to other friendly games of Warhammer.

However, as what you play is totally unenforceable (even in a house rule, your opponent could always argue "nah, their too close" or "they're far enough away from that other unit." to suit their own needs) it isn't really appropriate for any sort of pick up play and definitely is not suitable for tournament play.