PDA

View Full Version : Shooting in 2 ranks?



phoenixcrh
26-04-2010, 15:33
Wont the rule of shooting in 2 ranks create super gunlines? Empire and dwarfs for example.

lets say 3*20 thunderers with shields in 3 lines of 10 wide, shooting in 2 ranks. Thats 60 shots S4 AP-2 per turn :( and with the rumour that heavy cavalry cant march that is bad news for most people.

I know its like 900 points for the above units but its a core so it easily fill requirement and simply and an anvil and a couple of warmachines and gunlines become even sillier lol

Not to mention empire handgunners and even TK and OG :shifty:

Just dont like this slow slide into whats essentially a 40k revamp of fantasy, charging bonuses and what not...

EDIT - And another scary thought just occured to me, what about DE repeater crossbows?!? worst case scenario could see a unit of 20 multi shots, 10 wide and 2 deep firing 40 shots a turn :D christ I hope that doesnt happen!

maze ironheart
26-04-2010, 15:39
Then again won't the rule allowing all models in a unit to attack be even more over powered swordmasters will have a field day.I am just going to wait and see whats in the book as most rumours are only 25% accurate and it's just best to wait and see with your own 2 eyes.

DukeBorric
26-04-2010, 15:42
I thought the rumour was that it would be archers that can shot in 2 ranks, not all missle troops?

Edit- just reread the stickied thread my mistake.
your right that could make for some nasty armies

defunct
26-04-2010, 15:47
Yep, I also thought only of bows shooting in two ranks.

We'll see.

OrlyggJafnakol
26-04-2010, 15:48
Never understood this rule as there are numerous historical references of all archers firing at once/multiple ranks firing at once etc.

Eternus
26-04-2010, 15:55
Don't forget the rumours regarding fewer save modifiers, so there may be more shooting but fewer casualties - and anyway, I for one had got sick to death of either having to take small one rank missile units, or larger 2 rank units which have to occupy a hill to all be able to fire.

PeG
26-04-2010, 15:57
We will have to wait and see but if you want to tune down shooting it can easily be done by modifying the roll to hit table or adding/changing the negative modifiers.

Another possibility would be to change ranges for different weapons and of course the rules marching/charging/stand and shoot rules will be important in determining how many shots that can actually be fired before the unit might be in combat.

I cant really see my WE in large ranked units anyhow so unless they nerf the to hit table I dont see a big difference for me. Maybe 2 ranks of 5 instead of 1 rank of 10 but space to set up isnt really a problem anyway.

GodlessM
26-04-2010, 16:53
Is this a rumour? No, i.e. not for this section.

knightwire
26-04-2010, 17:23
:rolleyes:
Is this a rumour? No, i.e. not for this section.

Oh excellent, so you know the particulars of the rumor on shooting in two ranks then? It's in? It's out? It's for all, it's for bows? It's for left handed dwarfs on Tuesdays? :wtf:

Lighten it up GodlessM. I for one would very much like to hear the possible implications of the different variations of this rumor. You never know, one of the people "in the know" may even chime in to confirm or discount the topic at hand.

Like for instance there needs to be some boost to shooting if the unit sizes will be approaching what is rumored. I like this shooting rumor, but not for everyone. Let's hope some details surface. (Let's hope people can handle having a topic on it) :rolleyes:

Odin
26-04-2010, 17:27
You still only get the same number of shots you pay for. My handgunners and glade guard used to be in one rank of 10, now they're in two ranks of five. Either way, there's still 10 shots from each unit, they'll just be less clumsy on the battlefield now.

GodlessM
26-04-2010, 17:27
That's what the round up is for knightfire. I believe the rules on this section say no questions which is what this and the Warseer rumour hill has been going to the dogs because of so many question threads.

Lord Malorne
26-04-2010, 17:34
This is suitable for general discussion, not news or rumours.

McMullet
26-04-2010, 17:52
lets say 3*20 thunderers with shields in 3 lines of 10 wide, shooting in 2 ranks. Thats 60 shots S4 AP-2 per turn :( and with the rumour that heavy cavalry cant march that is bad news for most people.

I see what you're saying here, but it's pretty futile to speculate on such a small chunk of rumour.

What if weapons are half strength over half range? What if the "to wound" table has changed? What if save modifiers have been dropped?

It's obvious that 8th ed WFB is not going to be "Everything is the same as 7th ed, only missile troops shoot in 2 ranks"; other parts of the rules will presumably compensate for this change, but it's too soon to know how or how well they will do so in the level of detail you're going into.

CaptainFaramir
26-04-2010, 17:57
Children. The aggressive use of sarcasm is to be strongly discouraged.

2 ranks simply makes gunline more wieldy. Bear in mind the current penalties for moving and shooting are severe (-33% in most instances), I would not be suprised tosee similar modifiers or restrictions for gunlines (Move-or-shoot, additional -1 to hit if moved and shooting in two ranks), allowing non-shooty armies to out manouver/use more eagles/harpies/etc.

Hypaspist
26-04-2010, 17:59
The aggressive use of sarcasm is to be strongly discouraged.
^This

Knightwire
Linky (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143376)

You can find this as a sticky at the top of the Warhammer Rumours sub-forum.
Essentially the line is that one shouldn't ask questions in the Rumour forum.

If you haven't read the FAQ and Forum Rules yet, I would highly recommend it.
:)

genesis873
26-04-2010, 18:41
You can find this as a sticky at the top of the Warhammer Rumours sub-forum.
Essentially the line is that one shouldn't ask questions in the Rumour forum.

If you haven't read the FAQ and Forum Rules yet, I would highly recommend it.
:)

I don't view this thread as falling under asking a question because it is really a discussion on an actual rumour. (RAW vs RAI ;)) But, if the mods prefer to keep all 8th rumour discussion in the one thread then they will close/move it, simple as that.

I would prefer they keep it as only bows could shoot in two ranks. Actually I'd like to see archers able to shoot in 4 ranks. I love the idea of a massive 10x4 unit of archers letting loose on some poor, unsuspecting unit.

If they give the rule to non archers then I hope there is some penalty that doesn't apply to bowmen.

RanmaSolo
26-04-2010, 18:48
You know it really violates the spirit of "don't ask questions" rule to call this a question thread. He didn't "ask" if anyone had heard about 2 Rank Shooting. He "asked" what people's opinions of the rumor were. It seems like a perfectly viable discussion to be having about a rumored change to the game.

I agree that 2 Rank Shooting would have to be balanced based on the various other rules that may or may not change and speculation at this point would have to be a bit wild in nature. I do like the idea of shooting staying at a similar power level, but making it more maneuverable. Even if that means killing less each turn so that shooting can participate more. If that makes sense.

-Mike

Zinch
26-04-2010, 19:09
Wont the rule of shooting in 2 ranks create super gunlines?

The answer is a resounding NO, in any case it will create super "gun-doblelines" ;)

As other have said, we don't know the rules as a whole. I think that with only the reduction of the armour modifier, gunlines will dissapear for the most part (little enemys dying for shoting means they will arrive in numbers to your line, so you're dead)

Hypaspist
26-04-2010, 19:48
I don't view this thread as falling under asking a question *snip*


You know it really violates the spirit of "don't ask questions" rule to call this a question thread.*snip*

All I was pointing out by linking the FAQ was that in that sticky, it states that one should better discuss/ask a question about a specific rumour where it appears (which I think is page 26 of This (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=254672) thread), rather than create a whole new topic on the issue in the rumour section. (in my non-mod opinion of course :))

You are both quite right of course, that the Mods will move it, or not, as they see fit, I was merely offering my opinion and interpretation of the sticky :)
...as you were ladies and gentleman... :shifty:

Voss
26-04-2010, 20:17
Wont the rule of shooting in 2 ranks create super gunlines? Empire and dwarfs for example.


Gunlines already exist, though. If you go all in on gunlines now you can achieve similar results, particularly since its the machines that provide the massive damage.

What this will have more effect on is the folks who want to have a unit or two of missile troops, and hopefully improve them from lackluster to somewhat useful. At least in my experience, shooting in fantasy is rather ineffective unless you go 'all in,' rather like magic.

genesis873
26-04-2010, 20:20
You are both quite right of course, that the Mods will move it, or not, as they see fit, I was merely offering my opinion and interpretation of the sticky :)


Of course, certainly a legitimate interpretation. I didn't mean to imply that you were wrong, just that I disagree. I was just trying to state my opinion, though in retrospect I probably could of phrased that better.

The two rank thing could really make stand and shoot really deadly for some. Maybe night runners will become a bit more worthwhile too. (Not that likely though:))

Tokamak
26-04-2010, 20:24
Never understood this rule as there are numerous historical references of all archers firing at once/multiple ranks firing at once etc.

In history battles were fought on a different scale. You can't compare the casualties caused by the ranged weapons in game with the ones in history.

sulla
26-04-2010, 20:58
You still only get the same number of shots you pay for. My handgunners and glade guard used to be in one rank of 10, now they're in two ranks of five. Either way, there's still 10 shots from each unit, they'll just be less clumsy on the battlefield now.

The problem is, Odin, that gunlines suffered diminishing returns because the more shooters you bought, the more deployment area you required until you reached a limit that restricted your own troops movement and sight lines.

Doubling the number of ranks that can shoot allows you to buy twice the number of shooters for the same frontage. Since Dwarven elites aren't all that powerful in gthe current environment, I think you can be fairly certain this is what dwarven players would do. Not sure about other armies;it would depend on the efficiency of their shooters vs other units in the army at killing.

Regardless, more powerful shooters will only be a problem if the standard pitched battle remains the default mission. If the 'missions' are more objective based, guns will simply be a tool to achieve the goal, rather than a playstyle that will be strong by default.

Voss
26-04-2010, 21:15
Doubling the number of ranks that can shoot allows you to buy twice the number of shooters for the same frontage. Since Dwarven elites aren't all that powerful in gthe current environment, I think you can be fairly certain this is what dwarven players would do.


I'm not sure about that. If rumours are true, dwarves are much less hampered when it comes to charging than in previous editions. Not only can the enemy not be sure they'll hit the dwarves, the dwarves are only charging 1" less on average than the enemy. You may actually see more dwarven melee armies (or mixed armies) than previously, simply because the the idea that a competent enemy won't ever (or rarely ever) allow you a charge won't be true anymore.

Vsurma
26-04-2010, 21:35
Wont the rule of shooting in 2 ranks create super gunlines? Empire and dwarfs for example.

lets say 3*20 thunderers with shields in 3 lines of 10 wide, shooting in 2 ranks. Thats 60 shots S4 AP-2 per turn :( and with the rumour that heavy cavalry cant march that is bad news for most people.

I know its like 900 points for the above units but its a core so it easily fill requirement and simply and an anvil and a couple of warmachines and gunlines become even sillier lol

Not to mention empire handgunners and even TK and OG :shifty:

Just dont like this slow slide into whats essentially a 40k revamp of fantasy, charging bonuses and what not...

EDIT - And another scary thought just occured to me, what about DE repeater crossbows?!? worst case scenario could see a unit of 20 multi shots, 10 wide and 2 deep firing 40 shots a turn :D christ I hope that doesnt happen!

You are also losing 300+ pts whenever the unit breaks!

With outnumber rumored to be gone, your 2*10 unit has nothing but 1 rank and maybe a banner, normally people don't like using banners as the extra points they give up is a detriment. Now if your charged by a character or something else relatively hard hitting, you have 1-2 static cr and kill nothing most of the time.

When the unit breaks it gives up 400pts!

Sure its nice as long as no one comes their way.

Urgat
27-04-2010, 09:25
You still only get the same number of shots you pay for. My handgunners and glade guard used to be in one rank of 10, now they're in two ranks of five. Either way, there's still 10 shots from each unit, they'll just be less clumsy on the battlefield now.

No, mind you, not everybody plays your armies, some people field other units, and my goblins that have to be fielded 20 strong minimum obviously benefit from that. Yeah because I didn't always have a hill or the will to deploy them in one rank of 20 >>

Scythe
27-04-2010, 10:07
Don't forget the rumours regarding fewer save modifiers, so there may be more shooting but fewer casualties - and anyway, I for one had got sick to death of either having to take small one rank missile units, or larger 2 rank units which have to occupy a hill to all be able to fire.

Agreed. The single rank missile units look terrible on the tabletop. For artistic reasons, I am very glad with the rumoured change. Gameplay effects are impossible to estimate at this point.

soots
27-04-2010, 10:09
shooting in 2 ranks wont hurt the game that much because standard game size has increased 50%, missile fire wont make a dent in most things, especially if we expect to see 50+ horde units.

Lord Solar Plexus
27-04-2010, 11:32
standard game size has increased 50%

I'm afraid that is simply nonsense.

Odin
27-04-2010, 11:33
Since Dwarven elites aren't all that powerful in gthe current environment,

It won't be the current gaming environment though. Armour save modifiers reduced, units getting to fight back in two ranks even if they suffered casualties - both those rumours will be good news for Dwarf elites. As is this one:


I'm not sure about that. If rumours are true, dwarves are much less hampered when it comes to charging than in previous editions. Not only can the enemy not be sure they'll hit the dwarves, the dwarves are only charging 1" less on average than the enemy. You may actually see more dwarven melee armies (or mixed armies) than previously, simply because the the idea that a competent enemy won't ever (or rarely ever) allow you a charge won't be true anymore.

So, missile troops are being improved... but infantry seem to be even more improved.

Odin
27-04-2010, 11:33
No, mind you, not everybody plays your armies, some people field other units, and my goblins that have to be fielded 20 strong minimum obviously benefit from that. Yeah because I didn't always have a hill or the will to deploy them in one rank of 20 >>

Good - goblin archers needed a bit of help.

Sweep
29-04-2010, 05:32
shooting in 2 ranks wont hurt the game that much because standard game size has increased 50%, missile fire wont make a dent in most things, especially if we expect to see 50+ horde units.

You don't know what you are talking about. If you think that there will be 50% more models in each army that still doesn't offset the 100% greater increase in arrows (or whatever) being fired by two ranks as opposed to one.

R Man
29-04-2010, 05:51
I fail to see how two units of 10 handgunners are less formidable than one unit of 20. Shots are the same, but the single big unit can be destroyed in a single turn.

And yes, it does make your forward line less crowded, but this is really only important to the Empire as others, say Dwarves probably can't afford to take advantage of this due to the points cost of their missile troops.

Sweep
29-04-2010, 07:51
I fail to see how two units of 10 handgunners are less formidable than one unit of 20. Shots are the same, but the single big unit can be destroyed in a single turn.

And yes, it does make your forward line less crowded, but this is really only important to the Empire as others, say Dwarves probably can't afford to take advantage of this due to the points cost of their missile troops.

You make a good point. Especially if the allocation of armies is going to percentages rather than number of units.

I suppose the other side of that is it's easier to damage a smaller unit for panic tests, break tests, etc making them flee and possibly causing other units to panic.

Memnos
29-04-2010, 08:09
Gunlines will always be powerful. They always have been and always will. It's a one trick pony, though, so an army ready for it will destroy a gunline while elite armies(Which everyone is afraid of now) will be destroyed by them.

N1AK
29-04-2010, 12:50
I have no issue with two ranks for most units and think it's actually a benefit to the game.

That said, facing 30 DE Crossbowmen is bad enough, them being able to up that to 40-50 without the problem of finding space for them could make some of the most irritating non-comp builds even worse.

It will also benefit gunline Dwarves because they will be able to bunker more effectively. Atm the 10x1 wide shooty blocks are the weak links in the defencesive line. Once they can be shrunk to 5x2 it becomes harder to find cracks.

Odin
02-05-2010, 14:25
You don't know what you are talking about. If you think that there will be 50% more models in each army that still doesn't offset the 100% greater increase in arrows (or whatever) being fired by two ranks as opposed to one.

If your opponents are regularly wasting 50% of their missile troops by sticking them in a rear rank, you've been getting off very lightly.

There shouldn't be a 100% increase in arrows if you're playing a half-decent opponent, because they will already be making sure they're either on hills or in a single rank.

Lord Dan
02-05-2010, 14:31
I've no doubt that if this rule is true it will apply only to bows, as it seems like an attempt to make them more viable.

Lord Anathir
02-05-2010, 14:43
In all fairness bows/longbows are the weakest missile weapons and kind of needed a boost.

rtunian
02-05-2010, 14:47
well, actually, 2 units of 10 deployed 5 wide, next to each other, is better than 1 unit of 20, ten-wide because when the enemy does come to stop you from shooting, unless they are a flier or cav charging from close, you can have whichever unit is charged flee, and then flank charge with the other unit, giving the missile troops a much better chance to win in certain combat situations, which they would otherwise generally lose.

yes it wouldn't change the outcome against a dragon or chaos knights, but it would help against block infantry, or chariot/ fast cav from far enough away

yabbadabba
02-05-2010, 14:50
Never understood this rule as there are numerous historical references of all archers firing at once/multiple ranks firing at once etc. That has nothing to do with WFB I'm afraid as it is an abstract system and not historical at all.

Again, another rule that if true needs all the rules to be put into context.

willowdark
02-05-2010, 16:33
If missile units suddenly take up half their usual frontage, than most armies that currently take 2 will sorely be tempted to take three. That'll be the biggest effect of this rule, that 2 lines of 10 will be replaced by 3 2x5 formations. It's a small increase in pts investment for a huge boost in shooting efficacy, and DE RxBs, Glade Guard, handgunners and Thunderers would be foolish not to spend it.

Also, I think the chances of the game scaling up to 3000 has nothing really to do with putting more units on the ground, but rather that investing in bigger units will carry more reward in 8th so the room will be needed to fit in everything you want, including Characters.

3000 pts wont equate to more units, just bigger one. Armies won't get wider, just deeper.

Zinch
02-05-2010, 19:46
If missile units suddenly take up half their usual frontage, than most armies that currently take 2 will sorely be tempted to take three. That'll be the biggest effect of this rule, that 2 lines of 10 will be replaced by 3 2x5 formations. It's a small increase in pts investment for a huge boost in shooting efficacy, and DE RxBs, Glade Guard, handgunners and Thunderers would be foolish not to spend it.

Also, I think the chances of the game scaling up to 3000 has nothing really to do with putting more units on the ground, but rather that investing in bigger units will carry more reward in 8th so the room will be needed to fit in everything you want, including Characters.

3000 pts wont equate to more units, just bigger one. Armies won't get wider, just deeper.

And what's the diference for a gunline?
The point was that there'll be more miniatures on the front army so shoting won't be enough to stop them.

Lord Dan
02-05-2010, 23:48
And what's the diference for a gunline?
The point was that there'll be more miniatures on the front army so shoting won't be enough to stop them.

I'm not following this logic. Surely you realize that with a bigger non-gunline army you will also have a proportionally bigger gunline army? Basically you're looking at:

Non-gunline army + X
Gunline army + X

With X representing whatever rumored bonus 8th ed. will add to putting more models on the table. More importantly, if all missile troops can fire in two ranks the situation becomes even worse for non-gunline armies. Let's look at an extreme case:

1 unit of 500 marauders vs.
1 unit of 250 handgunners

Flat table, no terrain. Let's say we're on a table that only allows use to deploy the handgunners 125 wide, so we'll do that and have the marauders do the same (with ranks going back, obviously). Under the current rules we get 125 shots per turn as the marauders advance on us. Under the rumored 8th changes we get 250 shots per turn as the marauders advance.

So....

willowdark
03-05-2010, 00:39
And what's the diference for a gunline?
The point was that there'll be more miniatures on the front army so shoting won't be enough to stop them.

The OP said 3 units of 20 deployed 10-wide. My point is that those builds won't happen because 3 units 10-wide are unwieldly and won't lend themselves to good tactics and strategies. But 3 units of 10 deployed 5-wide will and be extremely effective at overlapping firing lanes and concentrating fire, at minimal further investment from 2 units of 10 and minimal risk due to better maneuverability around terrain and greater capacity to stager their line.

Knights, Fast Cav, flyers and skirmishers will not get bigger, so these concentrated fire bases will be hugely effective at wiping them out early and then further concentrating fire on the larger blocks, which will need to be cut down to size before engagement.

But gunlines based on missile troops have never been extremely effective. However, if Warmachines stay the same, which there is no indication they won't, Empire and Dwarfs and WE will get better, which is good.

Of course, DE will too.

Scythe
03-05-2010, 06:52
I'm not following this logic. Surely you realize that with a bigger non-gunline army you will also have a proportionally bigger gunline army? Basically you're looking at:

Non-gunline army + X
Gunline army + X

With X representing whatever rumored bonus 8th ed. will add to putting more models on the table. More importantly, if all missile troops can fire in two ranks the situation becomes even worse for non-gunline armies. Let's look at an extreme case:

1 unit of 500 marauders vs.
1 unit of 250 handgunners

Flat table, no terrain. Let's say we're on a table that only allows use to deploy the handgunners 125 wide, so we'll do that and have the marauders do the same (with ranks going back, obviously). Under the current rules we get 125 shots per turn as the marauders advance on us. Under the rumored 8th changes we get 250 shots per turn as the marauders advance.

So....

Now, if you had a bigger armies, you might get:

1 unit of 1000 marauders vs.
1 unit of 500 handgunners

If the table stays the same, the handgunners will still only be firing 250 shots.

Point is, it is rather useless to speculate on what impact this rule will have without knowing other rule changes. Perhaps the changes in movement will make it easier for infantry to cross the tabe, dimishing the impact of gunlines. Possibly the profile of a handgun gets adjusted in the rules, dimishing the impact of gunlines. Possibly the rolls to hit change. We can currently only predict what impact shooting in 2 ranks would have on the current rules, which will not be relevant anymore in 8th edition.

ftayl5
03-05-2010, 08:33
AFAIK, it's all missile troops. Then again, It's a RUMOUR-may not be true!! I think speculating and panicing about how something that might not even happen will affect our games, especially without including other rules in such speculaions is silly at best.

FAIK; maybe this rules right, and you can get 500 shots! BUT, Maybe their bringing back (did it use to exist?) the "roll a 1 to hit, then another 1 and you blow up" rule, or maybe the range is getting halved or maybe you can only fire a handgun if wearng a pink hat!

RichBlake
03-05-2010, 20:03
or maybe the range is getting halved or maybe you can only fire a handgun if wearng a pink hat!

I'd buy a pink hat so fast it's not even funny. I'm not wasting my 60 handgunners in some attempt to project my masculinity ;)

brendel
04-05-2010, 00:22
OP: it would mean that my sea guard get better, i like the idea of that.

Odin
04-05-2010, 12:27
Looks like its only bows which can fire in two ranks, according to the updated rumours. That is very annoying for my Empire army, especially if the other rumour is true and you no longer get to fire in two ranks when you're on a hill.

knightwire
04-05-2010, 13:03
Looks like its only bows which can fire in two ranks, according to the updated rumours. That is very annoying for my Empire army, especially if the other rumour is true and you no longer get to fire in two ranks when you're on a hill.

Yes, but S3 bows really can use something exactly like that to start becoming viable options in the other armies. Handgunners and xcrossbowmen are very good, solid troop choices as they exist. Bows (outside of the WE) are usually an afterthought to fulfill a core requirement instead of a intergal part of the army strategy.

I very much like the sound of that rumor.

Ramius4
04-05-2010, 13:06
@Knightwire

Yup, you may actually start seeing some of my 80+ Bretonnian Bowmen on the table (besides the one obligatory unit I field that can be skirmished).

CrystalSphere
04-05-2010, 13:09
10 arrows at S3 are the same, no matter if the unit firing is in one rank or two. Firing in two ranks donīt make bows better at killing things.

knightwire
04-05-2010, 13:09
@Knightwire

Yup, you may actually start seeing some of my 80+ Bretonnian Bowmen on the table (besides the one obligatory unit I field that can be skirmished).

I guess technically I will see them... right before I ride them down like grass with Silverhelms. :angel:

CrystalSphere
04-05-2010, 13:12
I would really like the shooting in 2 ranks to stay for all missile units, and bows instead get something like: if the wide is equal or greater than the deep of the unit, all ranks can fire the bows (well perhaps not all, but capped at some number). That would represent the parabollic shooting that only archers can do, also improve units like goblins with bows or lothern sea guard.

knightwire
04-05-2010, 13:14
10 arrows at S3 are the same, no matter if the unit firing is in one rank or two. Firing in two ranks donīt make bows better at killing things.

BS. Having a unit of 5x2 instead of 1x10 is a huge difference in maneuverability for my HE. Plucking off light cav or other missiles, and giving protective fire to my RBTs is ridiculously easier to manage than the impotent line of fail that is currently an archer unit.

Hell I might even buy light armor and command once in a while to help fend off flankers or to counter charge flanks. (Since I can run narrow like a regular unit.)

willowdark
04-05-2010, 13:15
10 arrows at S3 are the same, no matter if the unit firing is in one rank or two. Firing in two ranks donīt make bows better at killing things.

Yes, but for a measly 100 pts more you can fit in 50% more shooters while taking up 25% less of your deployment zone. Instead of 20 shots taking up the frontage of 20 models, 30 shots now take up the frontage of 15. That makes bows better, no matter how you look at it.

It also means you can concentrate 20 shots with more flexibility to stager your line, making it harder for fast units to threaten both units at the same time by making favorable overruns less likely. It also makes it easier to hug terrain to protect you missile base.

Ramius4
04-05-2010, 13:17
10 arrows at S3 are the same, no matter if the unit firing is in one rank or two. Firing in two ranks donīt make bows better at killing things.

No, but if I can deploy 40 archers within a 16" span of my deployment zone instead of having to spread them over 32" of deployment zone to get them all shooting, they DO become much more effective. A smaller footprint like that also translates directly into better, and easier line of sight since your own units moving forward won't block as many outlying models.

@knightwire: We're not scared of girls on horses ;)

Lordsaradain
04-05-2010, 15:56
Shooting in two ranks is great. Personally I think all ranks should be able to shoot.

Ramius4
04-05-2010, 15:59
Ever have a rifle fired right next to your ear? It's not good. Two ranks of handgunners maybe, but after that things get a little crowded.

CrystalSphere
04-05-2010, 18:27
Yes, but for a measly 100 pts more you can fit in 50% more shooters while taking up 25% less of your deployment zone. Instead of 20 shots taking up the frontage of 20 models, 30 shots now take up the frontage of 15. That makes bows better, no matter how you look at it.

It also means you can concentrate 20 shots with more flexibility to stager your line, making it harder for fast units to threaten both units at the same time by making favorable overruns less likely. It also makes it easier to hug terrain to protect you missile base.

I understand what you mean, and perhaps i did not explain myself very well. I am aware that by shooting in two ranks missile troops have an easier time with their los and targeting the enemy they want to shoot at. In that regard, yes, it is an improvement. But iirc, the rumour is that all missile weapons can fire in two ranks. If that rumour holds true, bows will have an easier time targeting things sure, but so will other ranged troops.

In the case that only bows benefit from the shoot in two ranks rule, then as mentioned before they will have certain perks, but they will be mostly the same as they are currently. If you spend 400 points in 50 empire archers (8 points each one), the enemy will be dealing with 400 points of missile troops, no matter how you deploy them. If you can only shoot in one rank, you will put a few units of 10 in a single line. If you can shoot in two, you may use several units in two rank deep. In the second case you have the advantage of having your deployment zone more clear, but what i mean is that in the end the number of shots is the same, the point cost is the same. So effectively the archers are doing the same thing as before, they just ocuppy less space on the board.

PS. Just realised empire archers skirmish, well for the sake of the example imagine that they do not. :P

willowdark
04-05-2010, 18:43
The sticky in the rumour forum has changed to _only_ bows can fire in two ranks, not crossbows or handgunners and such. So that will be a big improvement for them.

Although I realize that most people who really want 30 archers in 7th were taking them anyway, my point is that the main deterent for most of us was the enormous frontage and the amount of the deployment zone 3 lines of 10 takes up, and the restrictions to line of sight. With fire in two ranks, I see 3 units of 10 archers becoming standard for WE, HE and Brets, especially with the advantage that they'll have over the missile bases of other armies.

So in your example, say 400 points of Glade Guard, the difference is that you wouldn't see it in 7th, with individual exceptions, but in 8th you'll see it all the time.

Lordsaradain
04-05-2010, 20:07
Ever have a rifle fired right next to your ear? It's not good. Two ranks of handgunners maybe, but after that things get a little crowded.

Yeah well what about archers(the most common type of shooters in WHFB)? Why shouldnt they be able to shoot in multple ranks?

Necromancer2
04-05-2010, 20:27
Arrows from bows (at a distance) reach their targets in an arc... so 2 ranks firing makes all the sense in the world.

The rest should only shot in one rank.

Shadowsinner
04-05-2010, 20:31
Arrows from bows (at a distance) reach their targets in an arc... so 2 ranks firing makes all the sense in the world.

The rest should only shot in one rank.

historically units have had no problem firing in two ranks whether they carry crossbows or muskets. The first rank crouches on one knee while the other stnads behind them, gives them plenty of room to all fire at once

Harbringerxv8
04-05-2010, 21:02
Remember though that the sizes of units in Fantasy are abstracted. That unit of 10 handgunners is not just 10 handgunners. It could be 50 or 100 or 500 depending on what your sense of scale is.

Ramius4
04-05-2010, 21:48
Remember though that the sizes of units in Fantasy are abstracted. That unit of 10 handgunners is not just 10 handgunners. It could be 50 or 100 or 500 depending on what your sense of scale is.

This. That's part of my reasoning (even though I didn't say it).

knightwire
04-05-2010, 22:00
Remember though that the sizes of units in Fantasy are abstracted. That unit of 10 handgunners is not just 10 handgunners. It could be 50 or 100 or 500 depending on what your sense of scale is.

My sense of scale is 1:1. :D

(Sorry you walked into that one.)

Ramius4
04-05-2010, 23:34
@Harbringer. Trust me, knightwire's sense of scale isn't 1:1. If you give him 1 cheeseburger, he'll ask for 50 more. Definitely not 1:1:shifty:

(sorry knightwire, you walked into that one)

kyuzo
04-05-2010, 23:36
historically units have had no problem firing in two ranks whether they carry crossbows or muskets. The first rank crouches on one knee while the other stnads behind them, gives them plenty of room to all fire at once

but they also arent moving when they set up to fire. Perhaps a compromise would be no movement = 2 ranks of shooting allowed.

Tactical Retreat!
05-05-2010, 02:19
but they also arent moving when they set up to fire. Perhaps a compromise would be no movement = 2 ranks of shooting allowed.

I would be okay with that change. After all crossbows and handguns can't move or fire anyway.

Lord Dan
05-05-2010, 02:20
historically units have had no problem firing in two ranks whether they carry crossbows or muskets. The first rank crouches on one knee while the other stnads behind them, gives them plenty of room to all fire at once

http://k41.pbase.com/g6/44/696144/2/83773016.zXFtXou8.jpg

kyuzo
05-05-2010, 03:37
I would be okay with that change. After all crossbows and handguns can't move or fire anyway.

But bows/short/long/repeater crossbows can :/

Scythe
05-05-2010, 05:39
Well, the rule only affecting bows would be a little more fair I guess; bows aren't terribly effective at the moment. On the other hand, I still think missile units all look a lot better if deployed in 2 ranks instead of one ugly line.

Harbringerxv8
05-05-2010, 06:23
(Sorry you walked into that one.)

Haha, I suppose I should've said that it depended on what sense of scale GW uses.

yabbadabba
05-05-2010, 07:23
historically units have had no problem firing in two ranks whether they carry crossbows or muskets. The first rank crouches on one knee while the other stnads behind them, gives them plenty of room to all fire at once
See, you have to ruin a totally good argument about an abstract game by bringing reality into it!

jamano
05-05-2010, 07:52
Arrows from bows (at a distance) reach their targets in an arc... so 2 ranks firing makes all the sense in the world.

The rest should only shot in one rank.
I thought in fantasy the bows were shot straight forward, not in an arc, which is why longbows arent all that different from normal bows, you still need line of sight on things, and you only fire in one rank.(and why against large targets every rank gets to fire, because they actually are shooting it up at something)

Odin
05-05-2010, 11:23
historically units have had no problem firing in two ranks whether they carry crossbows or muskets. The first rank crouches on one knee while the other stnads behind them, gives them plenty of room to all fire at once

Muskets gerenarlly fired in three ranks I think.

The inability of handguns and crossbows to fire would still mean bows get far more benefit from this rule (as they need to do).

Hoping it applies to all missile units.

Urgat
05-05-2010, 15:43
Rumours has it that it's only bows, but if it's everything... lol, I'm gonna love my gnobblars even more.

willowdark
05-05-2010, 15:47
Oooh! For 40 pts, Gnoblars in 2 ranks of 10 would be VICIOUS!

Zinch
05-05-2010, 16:39
Well, I wish the rules were that every weapon can shot in 2 ranks and bows (of any tipe) can shot in 3 ranks if they not move.
I hate fielding my thunderers and quarrelers in a line of 10 dwarfs... it's just silly...

And I wouldn't field a lot more if they do this rule. Maybe an unit of ten more.

Tymell
10-05-2010, 12:33
Personally I like the idea of more ranks shooting. It makes sense, and makes such units more useful as more than just a single line.

True, it may change balance around, but such is the way with any new edition, I just look at it as a matter of adapting. I don't think two ranks shooting is going to completely break the game or anything, and there are still all the other changes to consider.