PDA

View Full Version : War of the Ring Influence on 8th Edition of Fantasy



RichBlake
03-05-2010, 13:30
Yo,

Looking over the Fantasy 8th edition rumours it's fair to say there is probably the usual fair share of pros, cons and inaccurate things being thrown about.

However one thing that seems fairly consistent is I'm seeing more similarities with War of the Ring in the rumours. This easily could be people speculating by simply comparing what GW did with WotR and then applying it to Fantasy, but it could equally be GW using the knowledge they gained from the innovations tried in WotR.

For those of you who don't play WotR (which is a game I do reccomend by the way, the model count needed is considerable however) let me explain what I'm on about:

WotR has several differences with fantasy, despite being about ranked up units fighting. Some may view these as "bad" differences but personally I think most of them work well, for instance:

In WotR you simply move the unit and as long as no single "company" (a movement tray) goes beyond the maximum move distance then that's fine and they can face where ever they want.

Magic users have a focus roll to pass, and as long as they pass the roll they cast magic. However if they fail to pass the roll they can no longer cast magic and you must move onto the next magic user.

When units charge your charge range is X inches plus D3/D6 depending on your unit.

That due to the rules and how the combat system works if your hard as nails 1200 point formation of kick ass elves assaults a 400 point formation of Moria Goblins you're going to lose a lot of Elves. Unlike Fantasy it is not the case where a super hard core unit can just wipe the floor with a unit and not take a scratch.


Now there are obviously more differences but I think these relate to the rumours pretty well.

Now these facts are actually bits I like more from WotR then I do the methods currently used in 7th edition of Fantasy.

Movement is always something I've seen as unneccessarily long winded, as all the big hitters/awesome/useful units either ignore them (Steam Tank, Abomination, Doom Wheel, Hydra, Shades, Stegadons, Peaguses Knights, Gyrocopters etc. Basically Fast Cav, Skirmishers, Monsters and the like), don't want to move (Handgunners, Reapter Crossbowmen, war machines and other ranged units) or simply it doesn't really matter (brick hard knight units just run straight through the army, off the board and come back on next turn facing the back of your opponents army anyway without wasting a turn reforming etc). So all the movement really does is make block units of footsloggers less attractive, when really (in my opinion) Fantasy needs to make them more attractive.

Magic works OK, don't get me wrong, but the idea that it can be more fickle is one that's always appealed to me. At the moment if you look at two players playing each other you can tell what is going to be ast and what isn't every turn. An Empire player with a Wizard Lord and two battle wizards vs a Dark Elf player with 2 scroll caddies with 2 dispel scrolls each and a ring of hotek means almost nothing will get through. Likewise wizards use the same amount of power dice every turn (usually) as the pool dice get thrown at the most important spell at the time, which rarely changes mid game.

The random charge distance would be awesome in Fantasy imo as even though I play a gunline I find that peopel almost ALWAYS know if they are in charge range. I play against good players and until some random element is added in (usuallly overrun or pursue moves) they keep track of exactly how fare they moved their units. 40K doesn't need random charge ranges as there is no penalty for declaring a charge, however there is not point in being able to fail a charge if players can ensure their opening charges are always just in range. If a charge range goes from being 16" to anywhere between 17 and 24 inches however, people will be more inclined to take a risk as the oppertunity rpesents itself, adding a level of "risk vs reward" again. You can wait until you know you're in range still, or you could go for broke and try for that 6.

Finally I think that the rumours of fighting in multiple ranks etc might make those deathstar combat units a little less untouchable. I might be wrong of course as there is less reducing armour saves etc. but it always saddens me to see, for example, 10 knights charge into 50 spearmen and kill them all without a single guy getting hurt. I mean really? Not a single knight's horse got tripped up on someone's corpse/spear and a spearman took the chance to jam a knife through the slit? It is a game and obviously abstract, but I think everyone can admit being able to fight combat after combat after combat without taking a singular casulty should be the sutff of legends, not "A Day in the Life of a Brettonian Knight".

That's my thoughts anyway, I'd guess that WotR is playing a big influence on the next edition of Fantasy. WotR is a bloody great game and many GW staff members I've spoke to have said they believe it to be the best game system overall that GW has ever produced.

In order to pre-empt some possible comments too, War of the Ring is totally different ot Lord of the Rings and if you're not sure how then I'd suggest you look into it. I'm no big fan of LotR but I do like WotR a lot.

Ozorik
03-05-2010, 13:40
Movement is always something I've seen as unneccessarily long winded

It is at the core of the game though. Manoeuvre is what warhammer is all about, and always has been. People who can get flank and rear charges win games (in theory at least).

Making things more simple may work but the WotR movement system will translate poorly to fantasy.

To be honest the only WotR mechanic that I can see working well within the fantasy rules framework is the variable charge distance, and possibly elements of the magic system.

Skyth
03-05-2010, 13:57
Variable charge range makes me not want to play. The more random stuff you add, the more skill needed you take out.

Alathir
03-05-2010, 15:00
I am actually in favour of the randomness. It adds just a little bit more chance to the game and also makes the game a tad more forgiving. How many times has the game turned against you entirely because of a slight mis-angling (not a word, I'm quite sure...) of a unit? This gives you at least the hope that you may survive your mistakes.

Plus, I think it's too soon to make any judgement calls on what we think of these rumored rules. Best have a few games with it first before we write it off.

Skyth
03-05-2010, 15:29
The more randomness and 'forgivingness' you put into a game, the less skill-based it becomes. That is the issue with random charges.

Gaargod
03-05-2010, 15:41
Indeed. I don't want my master crafted plan of charging, which took me four turns to set up a mass of linked charges which should more or less break the opponent's entire army to fail because i rolled badly on charge distance (for the combat, its less luck based as there are more distance + statics. If i roll say four 1/2s, not great odds but very possible... that's going to go badly). Hell, i don't want any of my charges to fail because i rolled badly on charge distance! Nor do i want my opponent to manage a lucky charge on my cav by rolling a 6 with no bonuses.


Random charges work better in WotR because of their turn system. If you roll badly on a charge with cav, their infantry is out of range and you both have a movement phase to rearrange with no failed charges. In Fantasy, if you roll badly, you get countercharged and die. Obviously, the whole charge = win aspect is being downplayed, but its still not a good thing.

OldMan
03-05-2010, 15:47
i must say i also don't like the idea of random charge range, and i am absolutely against free reforming on blocks. The rest seems ok.

willowdark
03-05-2010, 15:57
I didn't want to post this because the OP was about more than random charges, but...

Random charges and no marching for heavy cav, combined with Stupidity which there is no indication will change, will absolutely ruin my Cold One Knights. The best models in the army and the ones I've put the most time into.

I can't think of much context that combination of nerfs can be written in that will make up for it or make me feel better about it. It just feels like a bad idea.

mdauben
03-05-2010, 16:01
I've never played WotR, even though I'm a big fan of the smaller LotR game (I was always more interested in scenario play than in mass battle pick up games or tournaments). You bring up some interesting points, however.


Magic users have a focus roll to pass, and as long as they pass the roll they cast magic. However if they fail to pass the roll they can no longer cast magic and you must move onto the next magic user.
I kind of like this idea. Magic is still not a sure thing, but it does not have the chance of being catastrophically random. One of the things I never liked about WHFB magic was the miscast/Irresistable Force mechanic. The price of failure is often too great, and the likewise the benefits of success too great.


When units charge your charge range is X inches plus D3/D6 depending on your unit.
I'm in the "don't want" camp on this one, as I feel it takes too much control out of the players hands, making chance dice roles more important than skill.


Movement is always something I've seen as unneccessarily long winded,
I'm not quite sure on this issue. IMO mastering movement of units is one of the keys to success in WHFB. There are certainly areas that could stand streamlining, but I would hate for it to get too simple actual tactics become uneccessary.

Arkfatalis
03-05-2010, 16:01
If I wanted to play WOTR I would, I play fantasy because I like how the rules are at the current edition. If the rules are going to be this drastic then I'm going to quit.

RampagingRavener
03-05-2010, 16:06
As someone who's thinking of getting into Fantasy with 8th edition, the Random Charges is really putting me off. I just can't see how you can base a reliable strategy around such a mechanic. I've heard people say that it should encourage people to play more aggressively and get right up into the opponent's face before charging, but to be honest I don't buy it. It just seems like a needless variable that can screw one player over on the whim of the dice.

If I wanted to start War of the Ring, I'd be starting War of the Ring.

Ozorik
03-05-2010, 16:16
I'm in the "don't want" camp on this one, as I feel it takes too much control out of the players hands, making chance dice roles more important than skill.

Standards and muscians give a +1 modifer and a re-roll in WotR which will presumably be carried over so a M4 human can charge between 6" and 11" for example. The re-roll makes a charge of a 8" highly likely, assuming that standards and musicians are able to influence the dice of course. I don't see it as de-skilling, if anything the reverse is more likely.

The problem now is that experienced players can easily estimate charge ranges which leads to overly defensive play, an element of randomness (but within tight limits) would do away with this.

willowdark
03-05-2010, 16:23
Some rumours say double movement + dice roll, some say base movement + dice roll. That's where the difference lies in a more tactical game or a less tactical.

If my cav may potentially charge 8 or 9" rather than 14, I have serious misgivings about bringing them in the first place.

Speed of your unit has a huge impact on it's roll in your strategy. I should be able to count on fast units to be fast.

TMATK
03-05-2010, 16:35
The OPs points all sound good to me! :)

I would personally be fine with random charges. I say get rid of guess ranges while you're at it.

Once you've played this game a while, I find 90% of the time it's easy to visually estimate inches and the challenge is mostly gone.

MalusCalibur
03-05-2010, 17:08
The more randomness and 'forgivingness' you put into a game, the less skill-based it becomes. That is the issue with random charges.

This.


Indeed. I don't want my master crafted plan of charging, which took me four turns to set up a mass of linked charges which should more or less break the opponent's entire army to fail because i rolled badly on charge distance

And this.

I think random charge ranges is my biggest issue with 8th, because this is exactly what happens - one of the few remaining parts of the game that actually involves the players own skill (Movement in general but specifically setting up charges) is being thrown to the whim of the dice, in a game where almost everything is decided by them anyway.


If a charge range goes from being 16" to anywhere between 17 and 24 inches however, people will be more inclined to take a risk as the opportunity presents itself

What is more likely to happen is that, because of this random distance, players will not risk charging for fear of failing, which in turn (and combined with the shoot in 2 ranks rule) could lead to the rise of more gunline lists, as players minimise the impact that random charge distance will have on them. Not to mention heavy cavalry losing the ability to march and thus becoming much slower, allowing missile weapons more time to shoot at them, while lighter units that can still move quickly will be less likely to reach the gunline, especially before being whittled down or even destroyed.

I'm not saying everything will be gunlines and that the game's ruined, but the rules certainly seem to be favouring that approach at the moment.

VonUber
03-05-2010, 17:13
its just gws failed attempt to save a dying system (lord of the rings) after they invested s much on the models. they expect we willl play fantasy and go "ooo its like wotr we can play that too"... as if that will happen.

Alathir
03-05-2010, 17:14
The more randomness and 'forgivingness' you put into a game, the less skill-based it becomes. That is the issue with random charges.

Is it really so important that it be all skill based? Isn't the excitement of some randomness just as fun? It can turn a massacre into a close game and nobody enjoys a massacre; all the best games I've had have been close games and any rules that would increase the chance of both players having a chance is an improvement.

You guys also need to take into account the idea that combat is going to be strictly initiative based so getting the charge might not be as vital as it is now, if the rumor is true.

Skyth
03-05-2010, 17:28
Not all skill based, but I want who wins or loses to be mostly skill based. And the 'excitement' is also fustration when it destroys your careful planning.

It seems the people who are for random charges are part of the group that want to be able to win regardless of how badly they were outplayed.

Unfortunately, this is part of the core GW demographic.

Bac5665
03-05-2010, 17:37
Is it really so important that it be all skill based? Isn't the excitement of some randomness just as fun? It can turn a massacre into a close game and nobody enjoys a massacre; all the best games I've had have been close games and any rules that would increase the chance of both players having a chance is an improvement.

No, its not important to be all skill based, but it should be the backbone of the game. The more skilled player should win the majority of the time, at all levels of play. What I mean by that is that if I take to noobs, the one that understand the game better should win more often than not. At the same time, if I take the two best players in the world, the better one should win more often. There are many games that have strategy that once you get the strategy, the only difference is luck. See Monopoly. There is strategy there, and it takes some skill to figure it out. But once your at a certain level, the dice will decide everything because the decisions are automatic.

I believe that 40K is like that too, albeit to a much smaller extent than fantasy. In 40K, there is a fundamental level of strategy that you have to master to be good. But past that, luck, match-up and scenario will determine the outcome, not skill.

Now, the movement system in fantasy, which many people deride as "clunky" or "slow" is the reason why Fantasy allows for a much higher level of strategy than the other games. Because distances of a mm can decide a game, skill, judgment and advance planning are everything in winning. If you can't predict your opponent's movements, you can't beat them. If you can't judge precise distances better than your opponent, you can't beat them. This is what makes Fantasy a great game to me. I can control the angle that fights occur to set up future flank charges. I can bait and flee to destroy my opponent's plans. Two things make all of these things, these things that for me ARE Fantasy, the beginning middle and end of the hobby: The precise movement rules, and the SCR rules that make it matter what part of a unit I engage.

That's why 8E edition terrifies me. (And why WotR sounds potentially fun once in a while, but not as serious or intellectually challenging as Fantasy). Simplifying movement and introducing randomness make movement less precise and easier to master, reducing the level at which strategy makes a difference. Emphasizing kills over SCR makes flank charges less important, reducing the importance of movement. Both of these things together threaten the heart of what makes Fantasy a great game to me.

And GW is going to make both changes. That much is clear. The only question is the extent of the damage. Now, it may be that GW will do ok, and only cause minimal damage to these core parts of Warhammer and the game will still be fun. I have hope of that. But I have no faith in GW to protect that core, not when the developers this edition have written Army Book after Army Book that has assaulted that foundation. Not when GW is hell bent on turning fantasy into 40K with dragons in a misguided attempt to increase profits. (It will just kill fantasy; people play fantasy because it's different from 40K. Make them the same and people will just play 40K because Tanks are Cool. This is pretty obvious, but GW doesn't seem to get it). So I have no faith. I'm happy to wait and see, and I'm not selling my minis: I can always play 7E after all. But I'm very disappointed with the rumors that are surfacing. They point to the wrong direction. And it's getting worse all the time.

Nuada
03-05-2010, 17:44
I'm seeing more similarities with War of the Ring in the rumours.

Yeah, as soon as WotR was released alot of my friends were saying this is what 8th edition is trying to be.

Dasyatis
03-05-2010, 18:29
Personally, I`m all for it.

For me, the strategy of a game comes from the maneuver and application of force. To find that I`m in a position where moving a single mm extra would make the difference between winning and losing is laughable. I order my cavalry to move up the left flank. I don`t order my cavalry to move several meters forward, turn slightly, then move another couple of meters. I just tell them where I want them to go and they do the rest.

Think of yourself more as the general of the battle. You might want your cavalry to hit the flank of some archers in exactly two minutes fifty seconds but that really isn`t your choice. The ground may be a little rougher than expected. The sun might be glaring in your eyes. Could be anything.

Some of your units might not make it in time. A good general will have a contingency plan in mind for that. You need to plan for failing the charge as much as you need to plan for making it. If its absolutely essential that something gets charged then you need to make sure you`ve got several things charging it.

mdauben
03-05-2010, 18:31
Is it really so important that it be all skill based?
Not all, but in the opinion of many players WHFB already seems to have too much randomness. The basis of the mechanics, IMO, should be skill, otherwise its just a dice rolling contest.


Isn't the excitement of some randomness just as fun?
Not really. If I lose a game simply becuase of a random die role, I'll be pissed and if I win a game simply because of a random die role, where is the satisfaction? :rolleyes:

Ozorik
03-05-2010, 18:40
Not all, but in the opinion of many players WHFB already seems to have too much randomness. The basis of the mechanics, IMO, should be skill, otherwise its just a dice rolling contest.


Not really. If I lose a game simply becuase of a random die role, I'll be pissed and if I win a game simply because of a random die role, where is the satisfaction? :rolleyes:

The same could be said for active combat resolution, or pretty much anything in the game that doesn't occur in the movement phase (and sometimes not even then).

Skill in warhammer, like most wargames, is basically risk management. A greater degree of uncertainty over charge ranges is still manageable while at the same time forcing players to put more thought into their movement phase.

RichBlake
03-05-2010, 19:40
The problem now is that experienced players can easily estimate charge ranges which leads to overly defensive play, an element of randomness (but within tight limits) would do away with this.


This is my main issue. The problem with guess range in 40K was that it was too accurate and too easy to guess, combine this with it's super effectiveness (S9 AP3 Basilisks mash everything for instance) that it didn't really help.

In Fantasy though there are three times you guess distances (you never guess in WotR or LotR as you can always measure):

1) To see if magic/shooting/ranged stuff is in range.
2) To see if you're in charge range
3) Guess range weaponary

1 isn't really and issue as you need a range of a weapon. You only need to "Guess" something like "under 24/32/42/72 inches" and possibly half those for short range. There isn't much guess work here but neither is it neccessary as the only penalty for being out of range is not shooting, and if you cant shoot your opponent probably cant either.

3 also isn't an issue as the artillery dice ensures that even the best guess range users cannot always hit. I'm pretty good at guess ranges, but every now and again cannonballs will go flying over the head sof big things, or fall short occasionally.

2 is the issue as if you fail a charge you get hammered, but veteran players NEVER fail charges (or hardly ever) until after the back of your army is broken and they are just trying to mop up.





I think random charge ranges is my biggest issue with 8th, because this is exactly what happens - one of the few remaining parts of the game that actually involves the players own skill (Movement in general but specifically setting up charges) is being thrown to the whim of the dice, in a game where almost everything is decided by them anyway



Despite appearences I actually like the Fantasy movement system as it feels like troops are actually marching in formation, there are a few issues though:

As things are in Fantasy anything that ignores the movement system is seen to be useful. Fast Cav are awesome in Fantasy, so are monsters and skirmishers. Flyers go one further again as they are either skirmishing flyer units or monster flyers which can turn on the spot. This means that it's another nail in coffin for core block units. Why take massive (and cool) block unit Spearmen when they can be outmanouvered and shot to pieces over 6 turns by a 105 point unit of Pistoliers?

Secondly while it feels realistic in terms of moving and wheeling the reform and things do not. The game is obviously abstract but I find it hard to believe my men are really that stupid that it takes the same amount of time to charge belowing into combat as it takes to march back 2 inches.

Perhaps there is a compramise but on balance I don't think it will make too much difference. You'll still (I assume) have to declare chargers first so you'll have a charge arc, all it means is that you can swivel you unit of men around a lot easier.



What is more likely to happen is that, because of this random distance, players will not risk charging for fear of failing, which in turn (and combined with the shoot in 2 ranks rule) could lead to the rise of more gunline lists, as players minimise the impact that random charge distance will have on them. Not to mention heavy cavalry losing the ability to march and thus becoming much slower, allowing missile weapons more time to shoot at them, while lighter units that can still move quickly will be less likely to reach the gunline, especially before being whittled down or even destroyed.

I'll have to disagree here. If charge range is currently 16", and it becomes 16"+D6, even by rolling a 1 you're still charging further. You still can get turn 2 gaurenteed charges (unless a "1" means failed charge which would be lame I must admit). However if you're willing to risk it then you can try for more. Everything in a wargame is about risk, there are very few things that allow automatic hits, wounds or the like and very few that gaurentee them all game together. As a result everything is about how much you're willing to risk. If you're not prepared to risk a failed charge then you get an extra 1" to your charge range, if not then you can get anywhere between 1 and 6.



Not all, but in the opinion of many players WHFB already seems to have too much randomness. The basis of the mechanics, IMO, should be skill, otherwise its just a dice rolling contest.

Really? War Machines aside I think Fantasy is the most reliable of the three gaming systems. Combine statistcal maths with static combat res and you can almost (but not fully) assure victory in combat. The correct mixture of abilities and power dice can almost assure you get the spells you need to work. While charges are meant to be guess range I never see hardly anyone fail a charge, if they do it's usually late game and by literally a fraction of an inch.

The most random thing that I disagree with at the moment is random spell generation. If it would be broken for you to have a certain spell every game then it is the spell that's broken, not the way you choose them.






Skill in warhammer, like most wargames, is basically risk management. A greater degree of uncertainty over charge ranges is still manageable while at the same time forcing players to put more thought into their movement phase.

Well said.

I see people's points about adding in randomness, but it's randomness that can be avoided.

If they said charge range for horses was now 3D6 I would be agreeing with those sentiments. However assuming a 1 still lets you charge what you have is a minimum and a maximum range. A 5/6 chance of getting 1 or more inches higher then the minimum, 1/3 chance of getting 2 or more inches, 1/2 chance of getting 3 or more inches etc. There is still reliability there for those who need it, but for those who dare to risk their 500 point killing machine unit they could take their opponents by surprise with a 6" added onto their charge.

willowdark
03-05-2010, 19:55
The skill in Warhammer is in siezing the initiative and putting pressure on your opponents in just the right places, boxing him in and setting up advantageous overruns and pursuits, that is why cavalry has reigned supreme in this game.

But taking away the speed of cav and emphasizing an infantry metagame where the charge doesn't matter will only make the game slower and less interesting. The excitment of the game is in outmanuevering the enemy and exposing the flank. the further block infantry is emphasized the less opportunity there will be to swing around and outflank, and the more often games will be two lines walking up to each other and fighting face to face.

Speed is exciting. Slow units have a role, but they shouldn't define the game. And working in a mechanism deliberately to slow down cav will only create needless frustration.

I wonder about those who desire more randomness. Have you been taking a lot of Stupidity and/or Fear checks in your armies. Some randomness is interesting, but too much is just frustrating.

Few things take the wind out of my sails like setting up a charge and then failing a fear check. How will random charges be any different?

vega528
03-05-2010, 19:59
you know one big thing about wotr that as it stands warhammer lacks is might. My games rarely have any failed charges that matter because you can change the roll to guarantee the charge. Unless they want to add something like might into the warhammer, charges will be more random then even in wotr.

Another thing is that warhammer there is a real penalty to failing a charge that doesn't exist in wotr. Failing a charge can disrupt your whole battle line, leave the flanks of a unit unprotected, and increase the odds of your opponent charging you. In wotr there is no failed charge penalty and I have no problem if I mess up a move and now would need a six to charge since if I make it thats great, and if I fail no worries since my opponent probably won't make it either.

Lastly, there is no real charge bonus for infantry in wotr. Sure you get plus one attack per company, but when we are throwing thirty some odd dice is an extra 1-3 dice really gonna matter that much to anyone. 8th will most likely have some sort of charge bonus, be it strike first, + initiative, or + combat res, that will make it when you fail a charge and increase your opponents chance of charging awful.

Now Im not saying that wotr is a bad system, I actually love the game, but as it stands I don't think that merging it into warhammer is the best idea.

Balerion
03-05-2010, 20:18
Variable charge range makes me not want to play. The more random stuff you add, the more skill needed you take out.
In a dice-based game I have to call bull---- here. As Ozorik eloquently stated, the game is about maximizing your luck. Random charges won't change this, although they will change how you go about effecting it.


Not all skill based, but I want who wins or loses to be mostly skill based.
You should probably find another game, then, as armylist building is the #1 determinant of success at the moment.



Now, the movement system in fantasy, which many people deride as "clunky" or "slow" is the reason why Fantasy allows for a much higher level of strategy than the other games. Because distances of a mm can decide a game, skill, judgment and advance planning are everything in winning. If you can't predict your opponent's movements, you can't beat them. If you can't judge precise distances better than your opponent, you can't beat them. This is what makes Fantasy a great game to me. I can control the angle that fights occur to set up future flank charges. I can bait and flee to destroy my opponent's plans. Two things make all of these things, these things that for me ARE Fantasy, the beginning middle and end of the hobby: The precise movement rules, and the SCR rules that make it matter what part of a unit I engage.
You appear to be defining "skill" in a very narrow way, mostly having to do with the mechanical ability to estimate distance better than your foe can. My definition of skill would involve a much greater portion of reacting to a dynamic, ever-changing battlefield, and dealing with setbacks in innovative, unexpected ways.

You seem to desire a mechanical, deterministic numbers game, rather than a chaotic simulation of fictional battles.

RichBlake
03-05-2010, 20:22
The skill in Warhammer is in siezing the initiative and putting pressure on your opponents in just the right places, boxing him in and setting up advantageous overruns and pursuits, that is why cavalry has reigned supreme in this game.


I personally feel Cavalry reign a bit too supreme if you ask me. Nearly all the best units are either cavalry, move as fast as cavalry or fly. There's no real counter to cavalry either. In real life if you give a regiment of 100 men Pikes and watch horses charge into them those horses will be turned into kebabs so fast it wont even be funny. As it stands like 5 knights can easily kill 40 spearmen due to overrun etc. This isnt a game designed to copy real life exactly but it is supposed to mimic it. 600 point units of brick hard knights shouldn't be basically invulnerable to rank and file regiments imo.



Speed is exciting. Slow units have a role, but they shouldn't define the game. And working in a mechanism deliberately to slow down cav will only create needless frustration.


While I agree that speed is exciting you need a balance. There are far too many armies in Fantasy where you know you have won on turn 2 or not. These are generally heavy cav lists from Brettonians or Dark Elves which essentially are "I will have charged you turn 2. If I haven't fluffed my rolls I win".


I wonder about those who desire more randomness. Have you been taking a lot of Stupidity and/or Fear checks in your armies. Some randomness is interesting, but too much is just frustrating.


I play Empire good sir so not only have I been taking them I have been failing them! However it's also why I don't leave home without the Imperial Banner, I personally fear .... fear and terror checks and I take something to counter my personal anguish. Besides once again I must point out this isn't random, it's the possibility to be random that you don't have to neccessarily take. Also, for the record, it's also rumoured that fear wont work as it is, so thats even less random again.



Few things take the wind out of my sails like setting up a charge and then failing a fear check. How will random charges be any different?

Because you could still charge say, 16 inches knowing that even if you roll a 1 you'll still be in charge range. Even a Ld 10 model with a re-roll can fail fear.


you know one big thing about wotr that as it stands warhammer lacks is might. My games rarely have any failed charges that matter because you can change the roll to guarantee the charge. Unless they want to add something like might into the warhammer, charges will be more random then even in wotr.


While that's true Might points are rather limit unless you invest heavily in them. Personally I like the might system though I wouldn't want to see it in Fantasy. In WotR though (forgive me if I'm wrong) a roll of a 1 is a failed charge regardless? If that wasn't present in Fantasy you could ensure a normal charge anyway without might or some such system.



Another thing is that warhammer there is a real penalty to failing a charge that doesn't exist in wotr. Failing a charge can disrupt your whole battle line, leave the flanks of a unit unprotected, and increase the odds of your opponent charging you. In wotr there is no failed charge penalty and I have no problem if I mess up a move and now would need a six to charge since if I make it thats great, and if I fail no worries since my opponent probably won't make it either.

While that is a good point I'd argue that in Fantasy since players very rarely fail a charge when they get experienced anyway it makes little to no difference what the penalty is for failing a charge as it happens once in a blue moon. If a failed charge just meant you move as normal I expect you'd find very little difference in the opening 2/3 turns of the game, which is what really usually decides who wins in Fantasy imo. Yeah occasionally you get a game to the wire by turn 6 and it comes down to a well guessed charge, but that's so rare it's not worth it and if you are out by one 16th of an inch will you feel any better then if it was because you rolled a 2 instead of a 3? In either case the game is decided on something so small but at least the second was random chance rather then not move the unit with scientific precision.


Lastly, there is no real charge bonus for infantry in wotr. Sure you get plus one attack per company, but when we are throwing thirty some odd dice is an extra 1-3 dice really gonna matter that much to anyone. 8th will most likely have some sort of charge bonus, be it strike first, + initiative, or + combat res, that will make it when you fail a charge and increase your opponents chance of charging awful.

That's only for infantry, the Cavalry get a much bigger bonus. Also you can get a bigger bonus for rolling a 6 on the charge range. I'd also argue in a game where each hit is a kill, 4 extra dice could do a lot (i.e. kill 4 guys :P).

In fantasy if the charge is that important, which it currently is, you get experienced players dancing with their units. I know against one of my mates my Steam Tank will dance around his Cold One knights until I think they are within 15" and hope I roll under a 6 for my steam points. Potentially that could continue all game. Under the new system it encourages players to take a risk every now and again to try and sieze the iniative a bit and take their opponent off guard.

Would you be expecting someone to charge when they need a 6 on a D6 to reach? Hell no! If they managed to pull it off would it catch you off guard? I know it would me, and that would be pretty tricky to deal with.


Now Im not saying that wotr is a bad system, I actually love the game, but as it stands I don't think that merging it into warhammer is the best idea.

Personally I think it sounds less of a merge and more like a love child of Fantasy 7th edition and WotR. Yeah 8th may look a lot like Fantasy and it acts a lot like Fantasy and it calls itself Fantasy but if you look closely you can see signs of WotR :P Glad I'm not the only one who sees it though.

Dungeon_Lawyer
03-05-2010, 20:54
Variable charge range makes me not want to play. The more random stuff you add, the more skill needed you take out.

I dont think you can deny that WOTR is influencing 8th ed. Only problem is if I wanted to play WotR I would, but I dont, so I dont.

I play warhammer.

I kind of lean towards Skyth on this too . I get the impression that GW is making fantasy too dumb and easy to play in order to drum up sales from the tweener market and their mommy's purses. Warhammer was attractive to me cause it was the "thinking mans game" now it appears GW wants to take it in another direction...

But Ill wait for the book to come out before making up my mind. Some of the changes sound really attractive, but that random movement thing- well that just sucks and might torpedo the whole edition.

GW just really needs to solve this "fix one problem but create another" paradigm that seems to shade thier game design ethos.

Alltaken
03-05-2010, 21:03
yeah fantasy's being butchered on probably the most important aspect of the game: Movement.

Random charges suck! You have to know distance charging to have charges be an actual strategic issue.

And movement, I really don't like so much open movement rules. Really, they could have worked a little bit more in the pivoting system, say have less M penalty or something.

The deal about fantasy is that is has to have a very good competitive level, the fun factor is up to players. Hardocores go cheese, guys who want to have fun play less cheese games.

Ozorik
03-05-2010, 21:04
Warhammer was attractive to me cause it was the "thinking mans game" now it appears GW wants to take it in another direction...


There are other alternatives out there; warhammer hasn't really been "the thinking mans game" for a while, certainly not in its current incarnation.



The deal about fantasy is that is has to have a very good competitive level, the fun factor is up to players. Hardocores go cheese, guys who want to have fun play less cheese games.

Fantasy (nor any other GW game) was never designed for competitive play and it probably never will be.

Alltaken
03-05-2010, 22:30
The deal about fantasy is that is has to have a very good competitive level, the fun factor is up to players. Hardocores go cheese, guys who want to have fun play less cheese games.


Fantasy (nor any other GW game) was never designed for competitive play and it probably never will be.

Actually I differ, the more complicated set of rules, bigger unit selection and tactical focus of the game makes it competitive. While the meta game might not be so, the spirit is that of a game with lots of tinkering by the participant. Number 1 rule is rule of fun, but hey they're selling a game, that must be the first and foremost rule.

Ozorik
03-05-2010, 22:51
Actually I differ, the more complicated set of rules, bigger unit selection and tactical focus of the game makes it competitive.

That just makes it hard to balance and the rules are no where near tight enough to be allow sufficient balance to ensure that all armies are, even approximately, equal.

GW's ethos has always been on fun "fluffy" games rather than tournament play and I can't see that changing. This does allow WAAC players to thrive but that just reinforces my argument.

I. Nailo
04-05-2010, 01:29
In all seriousness, I'm not worried about random charges. It won't break the game, it will just change the strategy.

It will still be heavily skill determined, because you will have to account for the added risk. You can set yourself up so that you will be within range on the roll of a 2+. Or, if you're feeling lucky, you can go for that charge that looks like you'll need a 5 or 6 to make. Instead of being able to survey the battlefield and say, with absolute certainty, where everything in your army is going to be in 3 turns, you'll actually have to have a back-up plan and contingencies/redundancies for when a dice go against you. It's just a new flavor for something familiar, and I hear a lot of people complaining because the strategies they've spent years perfecting are going out the window and they'll have to adjust to something new.

I'm also overjoyed about the movement changes! Honestly, I'm incredibly put off by WFB as it is now. I've lost games during deployment, and I hear countless other stories where people say the same thing. If you don't deploy a your battle line to optimize everything you've got, you may be doomed from the roll for who goes first. Being able to move your units around and change your battle line AFTER it's deployed is fantastic! You have to stop thinking about how it might hurt you, and think about how it might help you. Now, you can set up a battle line, get your opponent to commit to something, then shift around and throw their flanking maneuver out the window with a clever bait-and-switch.

I don't mean to be rude or condescending, but I hear a lot of complaints that I hear when any game goes through a change. The rules are changing, and everything you've built up to work like X, Y, and Z now will have to be re-tooled to be more flexible and work differently.

Don't look at it as a threat to your strategy and skill, look at it as a challenge. Yes, they're making the game friendlier to the casual player, but there will still be more than enough room for the great tacticians out there!

someone2040
04-05-2010, 02:25
Personally, I like random charge ranges.
Because I think it's boring that 100 out of 100 times if a player sets up in the optimal 7-8" range, a Human will charge a Dwarf.
Why is this so? Don't people think that Dwarves in some circumstances would be able to charge a Human? What happens if the field is not really 'flat' bu the Dwarves are going down a slope?

So to me, there should be some randomness in the charging rules. It makes the game more interesting to allow these circumstances. And just remember, a Human still has better chances of making the charge if they setup in that 7-8" range than the Dwarves charging them.

However, I don't think they should be borrowing a lot of stuff from WoTR. They should keep the games seperate and distinct and only cross over a few things (same hit/wound tables in 40k fantasy for instance) so each game has it's own rewarding and style of gameplay.

Avatar of the Eldar
04-05-2010, 02:54
I dont think you can deny that WOTR is influencing 8th ed. Only problem is if I wanted to play WotR I would, but I dont, so I dont.

I play warhammer.

I kind of lean towards Skyth on this too . I get the impression that GW is making fantasy too dumb and easy to play in order to drum up sales from the tweener market and their mommy's purses. Warhammer was attractive to me cause it was the "thinking mans game" now it appears GW wants to take it in another direction...

But Ill wait for the book to come out before making up my mind. Some of the changes sound really attractive, but that random movement thing- well that just sucks and might torpedo the whole edition.

Look, I've played WFB for 8 years and I also play WotR now. I think you guys are overreacting. A couple of similarities do not equate to a merger of rules or even a "dumbing down".

And the assertion that guessing charge distances is the defining feature of WFB is absurd. WFB about orchestrating a combination of (fantastical) forces to bring advantageous power to bear on your opponent's combination. GW is just changing up the sheet music a little. I think you're over-invested in one particular skill of range-guessing.

In full candor, I suck at it. I can do a lot of things well, but will lose entire games by half or quarter inches. Massed battles are not that precise. They're about marshaling forces not micro maneuvering individual units.


In a dice-based game I have to call bull---- here. As Ozorik eloquently stated, the game is about maximizing your luck. Random charges won't change this, although they will change how you go about effecting it.

You should probably find another game, then, as armylist building is the #1 determinant of success at the moment.

You appear to be defining "skill" in a very narrow way, mostly having to do with the mechanical ability to estimate distance better than your foe can. My definition of skill would involve a much greater portion of reacting to a dynamic, ever-changing battlefield, and dealing with setbacks in innovative, unexpected ways.

You seem to desire a mechanical, deterministic numbers game, rather than a chaotic simulation of fictional battles.

Here Balerion nails the weakness "randomness" argument. And, just to be clear, the charging rules as described are not random, they're variable. The closer you get, the more certain your charge becomes. Why is that so unreasonable? Battle is unpredictable; nothing is guaranteed. It's no less retarded than underestimating a charge distance by 1/4 of an inch and being left half-way to the target. That's pretty goofy if you think about it long enough. That's not how units behave in massed battles. But you like it because it's what you're used to and take satisfaction at being good at it I'd guess.

Let's take WotR out of the equation because that's got other baggage around it. Flames of War does not involve guessing distances but you couldn't call that a dumb game.

If you want to spin your arguments out to their logical conclusion, you should be playing chess or one of those chess-like games Alessio's new employer offers. No randomness there. Problem solved. You could use your painted WFB models for the chess pieces.

Hellebore
04-05-2010, 03:11
When you think about it, movement was one of the few non random elements in the game. Everything else in the game is a combination of a static quantity and its interaction with a random dice roll.

With movement you have only the static quantity. That would be like having a certain number of melee attacks always hit without rolling for it.

I don't mind this, because you would be risk managing just like you would in melee: I have a unit that hits on 4+ with 6 attacks. So I'll hit on average with 3. Against X unit probably not a good idea to charge. Against Y unit, those 3 hits are going to be good.

That is no different to: My unit has a charge range of 4+1D3 so an average of 6". I'll only make charges when I'm within 6".

Considering that most people will be guessing 6" anyway in a non random movement game, it's not much different. But, just as my 3 4+ hits might get 0 hits or 6, my charge gambit might get no charge or a charge from further away than I would have thought.

Hellebore

Balerion
04-05-2010, 04:24
I dont think you can deny that WOTR is influencing 8th ed. Only problem is if I wanted to play WotR I would, but I dont, so I dont.

I play warhammer.

This is a rather ignorant way to summarize it.

I started WFB because of the models, setting, and background. I didn't read the rules or play a game until after I'd already committed myself to the hobby by buying models and armybooks. Now, granted, I'm sure there are people whose first step into the hobby is reading the main rulebook and confirming that they approve of the ruleset, but I'd imagine these folks are few and far between.

The point being that most people get into WFB for reasons other than it being a perfect ruleset in their eyes. Let's put it this way; do you think that if WFB and WotR swapped rulesets since time immemorial you' have been playing WotR this whole time? Or would you still have leaned towards WFB because of the non-rules appeal it offers?

Now that I'm a player I want the best ruleset possible, and if WFB can improve its gameplay by drawing inspiration from other GW systems, I'm entirely in favour of it. I firmly believe that each edition of the rules should strive to be a better game, rather than just trying to be a tighter version of the last rulebook. That would lead to stagnation, and stagnation leads to death. I'm well aware that death sometimes leads to being raised as a skeleton in an unstoppable undead army, but not often or reliably enough for me to give death my seal of approval. ;)

dodicula
04-05-2010, 04:28
I think I have to see the full rules before I make up my mind, but I for one, am cautiously optimistic. This edition seems to encourage infantry blocks. and infantry blocks need encouraging.

Balerion
04-05-2010, 04:30
I think I have to see the full rules before I make up my mind, but I for one, am cautiously optimistic. This edition seems to encourage infantry blocks. and infantry blocks need encouraging.
This is true, too. I reserve the right to hate 8th edition with a fury. :D

But for now I'm being optimistic, and I'm encouraged by GW making ambitious changes to the gameplay rather than mere nips and tucks.

Knuuut
04-05-2010, 08:35
Wow.. A lot of power gamers here I see.. If all you care about is winning no matter what in order to get any satisfaction out of the game, well then I might see your point. Just remember that there are many players out there loving the setting and playing it for the sheer fun of it. I think we might even be the majority..

May I ask how incredibly skilled you have to be when playing a M5 army vs. a M4 or god forbid a M3 army to outmaneuver it? I know there are various strategies like baiting and magic to counter some of this, but the game in its current state heavily favors the movement statistics of the troops. If the rumors are true troops with high M values will still be at an advantage (knights will always charge infantry) but it might give the movement challenged armies a chance to get off a charge once in a while. How could this be bad? As it stands today, you know already from the start of the battle that your infantry blocks will have to take a charge to the face and must plan how to best withstand the onslaught (dwarf players Iím looking at you).

To all of you who dread this change: I challenge you to play a game or two with the reliable O&G army, thatís randomness at itís core. By your standards this army is totally unplayable and I guess we wonít find many O&G players among you. But my, how fun it is to play this army! I will even say that you will become a better player overall when using them as not only do you have to lay a cunning battle plan, you must also make a plan for the randomness should it go against you. Come to think about it that sounds a lot like how this rumor will play out.

I say bring it on!

Abduction
04-05-2010, 09:44
I don't like wotr that much so I hope that fantasy doesn't become something like wotr 2.

~PrometheuS~
04-05-2010, 09:52
They should so stop poking the lord of the rings carcass with the money stick, it died long ago....... and invest more money in fantasy :D

Spiney Norman
04-05-2010, 13:12
Yo,
WotR has several differences with fantasy, despite being about ranked up units fighting. Some may view these as "bad" differences but personally I think most of them work well, for instance:

In WotR you simply move the unit and as long as no single "company" (a movement tray) goes beyond the maximum move distance then that's fine and they can face where ever they want.

WotR movement works okish, its not remotely appropriate for a serious battle simulator, but as a mechanic for a representative game it works fine


Magic users have a focus roll to pass, and as long as they pass the roll they cast magic. However if they fail to pass the roll they can no longer cast magic and you must move onto the next magic user.

Magic is one of the worst things about WotR, it doesn't at all work well, the spells lists are very badly balanced and the pts cost for casters are all over the place. I don't think the WotR magic system could be applied to Fantasy for several reasons.

Firstly magic is a major part of the warhammer fantasy setting, it kinda works relegating magic to a slightly annoying irrelevance in the movement phase in the LotR world setting where magic is relatively rare, but in warhammer it needs to have its own phase and its own strategy, not just a minor afterthought as it is in WotR.

Secondly the cost of wizards. They are not, as far as we are aware, redesigning every army list for the release of 8th Edition, and for that reason alone magic is going to have to effect the game to a similar degree as it did in 7th or its going to leave magic casters severely over-pointed. Basically we'd end up with no-one fielding casters until their points got adjusted for the change in 8th as the effect of magic in WotR is negligible.


That due to the rules and how the combat system works if your hard as nails 1200 point formation of kick ass elves assaults a 400 point formation of Moria Goblins you're going to lose a lot of Elves. Unlike Fantasy it is not the case where a super hard core unit can just wipe the floor with a unit and not take a scratch.


I've played a fair bit of war of the ring, and never seen a formation worth more than about 600pts max. Are you seriously telling me you would field as much as 1200 in the same formation?

If you're talking about the striking order system in WotR, its another part of the game which is annoyingly simplistic and doesn't work particularly well. Having everything in the same type class strike at the same time is at the very least, boring and unrealistic. Are you telling me you'd want zombies and High elf swords masters striking simultaneously?

All in all, I think WotR has its value as a gaming system, its simplistic, easy to learn next to fantasy, but if its going to keep its identity as a gaming system they really don't want to be importing everything into warhammer.

WFB has a sort of quiet dignity about it, it rewards deep thinking and tactical play, whereas WotR is more a casual sat-afternoon game which you don't need to think too hard about. There is place for both in the GW world, but I'd prefer it if they didn't muddy the waters between the two.

willowdark
04-05-2010, 13:33
I personally feel Cavalry reign a bit too supreme if you ask me. Nearly all the best units are either cavalry, move as fast as cavalry or fly. There's no real counter to cavalry either. In real life if you give a regiment of 100 men Pikes and watch horses charge into them those horses will be turned into kebabs so fast it wont even be funny. As it stands like 5 knights can easily kill 40 spearmen due to overrun etc. This isnt a game designed to copy real life exactly but it is supposed to mimic it. 600 point units of brick hard knights shouldn't be basically invulnerable to rank and file regiments imo.

Really? If you ask me heavy cav has been rather mild in 7th ed. No, 7th ed was ruined by huge blocks of unbreakable, Fear causing infantry like Regenerating Plaguebearers and invocated VC Infantry, Greater Daemons, special characters and monsters like the Hydra and Abomination and the Engine of the Gods. Look at it objectively and you'll see that units of Knights have had little to do with the power swings of 7th ed. For the life of me, I'll never understand why Heavy Cav has taken the rap for it.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I'll keep saying it until someone hears me. Make spears better and you'll see more infantry. You don't need a bunch of convoluted rules changes to shove infantry down our throats and nerf Heavy Cav. And massed infantry with unlimited SCR and 30 attacks, slowly ambling towards each other counting on random charges will only water the game down, badly.

Sorry. I don't mean to rant, I just like the game I play now, and I don't want to see the speed and the pace leeched out of it.

The sticky in the News and Rumours forum says random charges will be added to the _base_ movement, not the double movement. That will ruin the ability to judge charges and lead to more charges failed, and more frustration.

mdauben
04-05-2010, 13:34
Wow.. A lot of power gamers here I see.. If all you care about is winning no matter what in order to get any satisfaction out of the game, well then I might see your point. Just remember that there are many players out there loving the setting and playing it for the sheer fun of it. I think we might even be the majority..
Wow. Nothing like walking into a forum and throwing around insults in your first post. :rolleyes:

Wanting the game to be more about skill than blind luck has nothing to do with "powergaming" or "WAAC". I can have fun in a game if I win or I lose, if the game is fair and the opponent is fun. Take the skill out of the game, however, and it just becomes a boring die rolling contest, with random chance having much too much to do with the outcome and that is what I don't want.


I challenge you to play a game or two with the reliable O&G army, thatís randomness at itís core. By your standards this army is totally unplayable and I guess we wonít find many O&G players among you.
The thing is, that is one army. If you don't like the random elements of the army, you can just play something else. Personally, I would never play O&G for just that reason, I don't want the outcome of my games that heavily dependent on luck. Its different if you force the same randomness on everyone, as they the only option is to play in a way you don't enjoy, or quit the game. :(

Ravenheart
04-05-2010, 13:37
WotR movement works okish, its not remotely appropriate for a serious battle simulator, but as a mechanic for a representative game it works fine

Are you seriously suggesting, WHFB mechanics should be a battle simulator?

Really?

I really hope, I misunderstood that part. :eyebrows:

Spiney Norman
04-05-2010, 14:20
Are you seriously suggesting, WHFB mechanics should be a battle simulator?

Really?

I really hope, I misunderstood that part. :eyebrows:

Not exactly, but I'd like it if playing WFB felt more like I was directing units of troops and less like a board game, which WotR is not very good at. Moving WotR units feels more like I'm playing a tabletop game of tetris, I actually really like how WFB movement works currently because it at least pays some lip-service to the kind of limitations that real soldiers would experience when formed up in tight units and manouvring around with them.

Avatar of the Eldar
04-05-2010, 15:16
I don't like wotr that much so I hope that fantasy doesn't become something like wotr 2.

Oh for Sigmar's sake! They will not be that similar, aside from a few specific mechanics. You'll be able to fill a book with the differences. 520 pages actually.


They should so stop poking the lord of the rings carcass with the money stick, it died long ago....... and invest more money in fantasy :D

Actually, I've read that it's WFB that's eroding its customer base. Not to say LotR/WotR are setting the world on fire, but they're peripheral to GW's core market.


Not exactly, but I'd like it if playing WFB felt more like I was directing units of troops and less like a board game, which WotR is not very good at. Moving WotR units feels more like I'm playing a tabletop game of tetris, I actually really like how WFB movement works currently because it at least pays some lip-service to the kind of limitations that real soldiers would experience when formed up in tight units and manouvring around with them.

Actually, I see it the other way around. Generals didn't mirco-manage and finesse blocks of troops on a battle field. It's about creating a strong battle line (perhaps weighted in the middle, one side or the flanks) holding it together and then having an eye for the throwing in reserves or plugging a breach. Units didn't act autonomously with the kind of dexterity WFB represents. Not even in the age of musket and rifles when soldiers were better drilled than any time since the ancient Romans and Greeks. In both eras it was about building a strong line and keeping it intact. That's what the WotR mechanics encourage - with the number and flexibility of companies within a formation and with the speed of movement that allows "sliding" around flanks, forcing the other player to extent their line or create a gap to the next formation.

As a footnote to you Spiney, I've agreed with your position in many other threads. We just see things differently/have different tastes on this topic.

willowdark
04-05-2010, 15:23
You're wrong if you think a general commanding a mix of infantry and heavy cav couldn't count on his cav to move faster and charge farther than his infantry. Taking away marching and imposing random charges will make the speed difference between cav and infantry marginal.

And having a champion in a unit should account for the ability of a unit to execute its role with precision. Not that that is currently reflected in the rules, and I'd like to see Champs have a greater influence on their units, but it certainly explains how a unit that is far away from the general could micro manage its own assignment. There would have been a strategy session before the battle, of course, and no regiment would've gone into battle without an officer to give orders and execute his assignment.

Lord Inquisitor
04-05-2010, 15:39
Are you seriously suggesting, WHFB mechanics should be a battle simulator?

Really?

I really hope, I misunderstood that part. :eyebrows:
No, but a degree of verisimilitude is necessary.


You're wrong if you think a general commanding a mix of infantry and heavy cav couldn't count on his cav to move faster and charge farther than his infantry. Taking away marching and imposing random charges will make the speed difference between cav and infantry marginal.
Well chariots have this rule, but they're not really considered "slow" either. They move at infantry pace initially but their charge range is quite a bit more. And random distance isn't necessarily going to make heavy cav "slow" ... with M7+2D6", the average is still 14. Sure, you could bomb a miserable 9" but if the 2D6 rumour is true, then a max of 19" is possible.

Overall, I can't say I'm too happy about random moves. A single D6 is far too "random" when it has such terrible control over the game. I know that everything in the game is down to dice rolls, but combat is usually decided by many dice rolls and the chance of of an outlandish result is minimal. 40K has had an edition of "running" being a single D6 roll and this roll can often be the difference between winning and losing a game involving objectives. I don't like games that can boil down to a single dice roll. While I understand the principle that there is a risk/reward with the randomness of running I would much prefer if it were a straight 6" as it'd put more control and ability to plan ahead for both players (and it'd make running through terrain disadvantageous).

On the other hand, I like 40K's difficult terrain mechanic (2D6-pick-the-highest), far more than Fantasy's predictable (and hugely punitive) terrain mechanics. So I'm not entirely against the idea of randomness as a risk-reward, but it shouldn't be involved in movement across clear terrain.

MalusCalibur
04-05-2010, 15:59
Wow.. A lot of power gamers here I see.. If all you care about is winning no matter what in order to get any satisfaction out of the game, well then I might see your point. Just remember that there are many players out there loving the setting and playing it for the sheer fun of it. I think we might even be the majority..

So according to you, anyone who doesn't like everything being totally random is a power gamer? Charming. I play WH because I like the setting, and I like to feel that any victories I win are partly down to my own ability. Since most of the game right now (magic, shooting, combat) is largely dictated by dice, it's nice to have an entire phase that is entirely down to the player (movement). Charging especially, because whether or not a charge can be made can pretty much win or lose the game, and in 7th a charge is entirely down to the players.


May I ask how incredibly skilled you have to be when playing a M5 army vs. a M4 or god forbid a M3 army to outmaneuver it? I know there are various strategies like baiting and magic to counter some of this, but the game in its current state heavily favors the movement statistics of the troops

Like it or not, judging distances is still more of a skill than rolling dice. And making sweeping statements like 'MX army' is ludicrous, since even Dwarfs have a unit that exceeds their base infantry's movement, while other armies have many that do so - skirmishers, cavalry, flyers, monsters. All of which can be used to outmaneouver an opponent. And high average movement alone won't mean much if you can't hit hard enough - it's all about coordinating charges, planning moves in advance because you know when your units will be able to enter combat (if you've judged your distances correctly). Random charge ranges will not allow this style of play to be effective. No one with any sense is going to try and make a charge where they need a 6 on the dice to make it (unless the unit in question is sacrificial), for example.


To all of you who dread this change: I challenge you to play a game or two with the reliable O&G army, thatís randomness at itís core. By your standards this army is totally unplayable and I guess we wonít find many O&G players among you. But my, how fun it is to play this army! I will even say that you will become a better player overall when using them as not only do you have to lay a cunning battle plan, you must also make a plan for the randomness should it go against you. Come to think about it that sounds a lot like how this rumor will play out.

I don't like O&G. Partly due to their background, and their models, but also partly due exactly to that randomness. I don't want my army to be largely outside my control, where no matter what plans I make the dice could screw up the entire game for me with relative liklihood - indeed, many players (including O&G players themselves) *do* consider them unplayable! Frankly I don't think an army has to be so hugely at the whim of the dice to be considered fun.
And I equally don't think it would make me much of a better player. As I understand it, there is little one can do to mitigate the effects of Animosity, the biggest random problem O&G face. So what would I learn that will supposedly make me a better player? To choose a different army? I must admit I feel very sorry for O&G players, since if random charge ranges are in the 8th book, they are screwed - absolutely nothing will be a given for them any more!
As I keep saying, the 'plan for when randomness goes against you' for most players would be simply not to risk charging at all.

Logan_uc
04-05-2010, 16:02
1ļ i don't believe in this change to random charges, it seems wishfull thinking more than fact base on some one hearing that WHFB will be more like wotr,and for what i have heard its false.

And if random charges are true this will be the end of whfb for a lot of people, if charges matter, this be frustrating to say the least, if they dont the game will be slow and boring.

2ļ nerfing heavy cav is just dumb, if heavy cav his so game breaking why arent brets a top tire army? there are 2 heavy cav units that people fear a lot (CK and BK) other 2 that give some problems (DK and CoR), now look at the nļ of unbreakable and stubborn units and monsters of doom that you find in7th, and say that this units dont break the game and heavy cav does.

Tae
04-05-2010, 16:12
Wow.. A lot of power gamers here I see.. If all you care about is winning no matter what in order to get any satisfaction out of the game, well then I might see your point. Just remember that there are many players out there loving the setting and playing it for the sheer fun of it. I think we might even be the majority..

Yes because wanting a game to revolve around your personal 'skill' (for want of a better word) as opposed to a straight dice roll is clearly means you're only interested in winning. :rolleyes: Please. Now how about you step down from your high horse before you fall off and hurt yourself?


To all of you who dread this change: I challenge you to play a game or two with the reliable O&G army, thatís randomness at itís core. By your standards this army is totally unplayable and I guess we wonít find many O&G players among you. But my, how fun it is to play this army! I will even say that you will become a better player overall when using them as not only do you have to lay a cunning battle plan, you must also make a plan for the randomness should it go against you. Come to think about it that sounds a lot like how this rumor will play out.

If I wanted to play a game whereby each turn had a 1/6 chance of ruining the entire game for me, I'd play Russian Roulette. But I don't, so I don't. So keep randomness in the random army for those who want it, and leave it out of the game for the rest of us who, whilst not necessarily 'playing to win' want to 'play with some semblance of control'.

Amnar
04-05-2010, 16:16
WotR movement works okish, its not remotely appropriate for a serious battle simulator, but as a mechanic for a representative game it works fine



Really? Serious battle simulator?

Avatar of the Eldar
04-05-2010, 17:37
If I wanted to play a game whereby each turn had a 1/6 chance of ruining the entire game for me, I'd play Russian Roulette. But I don't, so I don't. So keep randomness in the random army for those who want it, and leave it out of the game for the rest of us who, whilst not necessarily 'playing to win' want to 'play with some semblance of control'.

And therein is a core problem with WFB currently - it's not just about charges it's also about psychology. I know many (top) tourney players that choose VC and Daemons in no small part to eliminate the variable of psychology tests.

This mathmatical optimization, in service to winning (tourneys) reduces the variation of armies and list builds within armies.

If a broadly distributed degree of uncertainty - not just charge distances, but scenarios, objectives, magic side effects - blunts the ability to statistically optimize and encourages diversity, I'm all for it and it will bring fresh air to a game that, in my circle has become a predictable stasis of

a) pitched battles
b) on essentially the same terrain every game
c) against the usual suspects of army choices and list builds

I understand that some players derive satisfaction from getting really good at one thing and are anxious or put off by having to learn something different.

I'm in the camp that believes these rules changes, in aggregate, will create a whole new dynamic that will intentionally force everyone to learn how to adapt. To obsess about one or two mechanics will be almost irrelevant.

I also suspect I represent a (significant?) contingent of WFB players that have drifted away because of the rules and fossilization of game play. These rumors give me hope and I'm very willing to jump back in and buy more models.

It's hard not to read a lot of these posts as:
"Good" = "What I'm used to/good at."
"Strategy" = Guessing ranges + micro movement

Me, I subscribe to

BRING IT ON!!

maze ironheart
04-05-2010, 17:41
I say wait for the new book they screw the game up they'll be the ones who lose as people won't want to play a game were the rules are screwed up I personally will wait for the newbook and look with my own 2 eyes.It's like theirs hundreds of threads whinning about the book no ones looked at it yet and if someone has seen it and is leaking info I feel sorry for them when GW catchs them.

Tae
04-05-2010, 19:02
Me, I subscribe to

BRING IT ON!!

Personally I subscribe to 8th Ed as follows:

BRING IT ON!!*

That one condition being don't let my games be decided on one roll of a single dice that makes no sense whatsoever.

Sure, games being decided by whether Hero A passes his final armour save whilst being attacked by Hero B, that's fine. It's all cool and epic and everyone loves it.

Having a game decided by whether your unit of spearmen charge 6" and hit the side of a mass combat or, for some utterly unknown reason, decide to pull up just short and watch the rest of their army get horribly massacred sounds like a surefire way to make sure that my entire gaming experience is ruined - and that would apply on whichever side of the board I was (i.e. whether I was using the spearmen or my opponent was).

Balerion
04-05-2010, 19:56
Why would a game be decided by that? Are you playing 250 point games where you and your opponent each control one block of troops?

Some of you guys react like these projected rules changes will only apply to to, and nobody else. Your opponent will fail just as many key charges as you will. If you are truly skilled it will still come to the forefront over the course of a game.

willowdark
04-05-2010, 20:07
No different than failing a fear test. Games are decided by that all the time. Sometimes getting that Static 6 infantry block into combat after your initial cav charge looses all its charging bonuses is the difference between winning that critical combat or not.

Hundreds and hundreds of points can easily be decided by a single failed charge, especially when it hinges on something as fickle as a die roll.

Tae
04-05-2010, 20:31
Why would a game be decided by that? Are you playing 250 point games where you and your opponent each control one block of troops?

Yes because clearly it's possible to have a spearman unit charge into the side of a mass combat when we use 1 unit each. :rolleyes:


Some of you guys react like these projected rules changes will only apply to to, and nobody else. Your opponent will fail just as many key charges as you will. If you are truly skilled it will still come to the forefront over the course of a game.

I'll be equally disappointed in the mechanic when my opponent sets up a charge only to roll poorly and have it all fail.

And nothing will truely underline a players skill than setting up a wonderful set of charges from multiple units, only to roll a series of 1s. Wait, did I say underline? Sorry, I meant undermine.

I. Nailo
04-05-2010, 20:47
Honestly, the random charge range is not that bad... if you know how to plan for it. It's an unfamiliar strategy that everyone will have to get used to. It comes down to this:
either
a) set up your unit for an easy charge that only requires a 3+ or 2+, or
b) go for the gusto, and hope for that magical 5+ or 6.

And, as it's been said before, your opponent is playing by the same rules, and will have to deal with their own random charges. It's not like your army will be playing in a bubble with the new rules while the other army trounces you with the old.

I'm glad they're making this change, because no matter how hard I try, my estimations always wind up being over or under by about 1 or 2 inches. And I've met people who have played for a good long time who still can't guess ranges well at all. It's not an easy skill to learn, and I've gotten my army trounced by people who are in construction or architecture, whose job is based on said skill. They HAVE to develop it in order to do their job quickly, whereas I (who work in retail) have no such need and don't utilize such a skill on a regular basis.

This change is going to encourage new players as opposed to penalizing them for not having a skill that someone else has (new or veteran). They'll still have to learn risk management, but that's a much easier skill to learn than guessing distances.

And with the whole movement thing, I'm going to repeat myself: it adds a new level of strategy that the game presently lacks. Right now, set-up is everything, and I have lost games because a unit was not placed in its optimal position before the game even started. And it's not just me, other people at my FLGS have the same complaint. The game is so unforgiving, that one mistake means you lose, and lose big. One unit dies, which leaves another one open, and suddenly your battle line is falling apart like a house of cards in a stiff wind. Honestly, that's not my definition of fun, as I'd rather have a chance to still pull off a victory after one round of bad rolls or one small mistake... and that sounds like what the new movement system offers.

Ozorik
04-05-2010, 20:54
And nothing will truely underline a players skill than setting up a wonderful set of charges from multiple units, only to roll a series of 1s.

Nothing will truly underline a players skill by setting up a series of risky charges which his opponent doesn't expect and who's units are out of position and unsupported with sufficient redundancy that at least 1 critical charge makes contact.

Which of these examples exhibits more flare?

Paraelix
04-05-2010, 20:59
One of the rumours I have heard (not on the internet) was the possibility of the Magic Phase occurring before movement or at the same time as movement. Similar to WotR. The proposed intention for such was that the player who went first wasn't immediately in range with all his magic missiles and spells...

theunwantedbeing
04-05-2010, 21:07
One of the rumours I have heard (not on the internet) was the possibility of the Magic Phase occurring before movement or at the same time as movement. Similar to WotR. The proposed intention for such was that the player who went first wasn't immediately in range with all his magic missiles and spells...

I could see magic working if it was like 40k where there is no magic phase per-say, merely you get oppertunities to use your spells throughout the turn, both yours and your opponents.

(I've made my own magic ruleset and they work fine as a seperate phase or when worked into the entire turn, so its perfectly possible for GW to manage it if I can.)

Random charges would just be one of many many changes.
So it may end out that it's not that big a deal.
Although on the current rules, random distance charges does screw with the way the game works a little too much.

We'll see what happens when 8th arrives anyway.
Arguing over rumours is a bit silly anyway, its likely that what we are arguing over wont even exist.

Could be just that somebody who has never heard of WotR has gotten hold of a rulebook of it with "8th edition" scrawled over the cover.
Hence the similarity in the rumours to the system.

Lord Inquisitor
05-05-2010, 01:48
No different than failing a fear test. Games are decided by that all the time. Sometimes getting that Static 6 infantry block into combat after your initial cav charge looses all its charging bonuses is the difference between winning that critical combat or not.

Hundreds and hundreds of points can easily be decided by a single failed charge, especially when it hinges on something as fickle as a die roll.

And this was one of the big complaints of 7th - that a single roll could have such a big effect and even autodestroy units. This is solidly rumoured to be changed in 8th. Feels like two steps forward, one step back in that regard...

One thing that's been not much talked about is that if you are withing move+1" then there's no risk of failure.

Tactical Retreat!
05-05-2010, 02:17
If warhammer was a serious battle simulator there would be no movement phase. You (general) would deploy the units and give them basic objectives, and then sit on a hill and watch as the engagement played out. Maybe you'd get a second deployment phase mid game to send in the reserves. That's pretty much it.

As for the single roll thing, that's already so prevalent in fantasy that I don't really care. Terror tests, Irresistable force on an uber spell, failed look out sir etc. are all examples of dice rolls that arbitrarily end the game. Fantasy is built on the foundation that nearly everything has a risk to **** up and die at any time.

These more random charges might force people to be a bit more thoughtful and make backup plans, so I think it's okay. Either way it makes my dwarf infantry get that little extra movement they so sorely need so I'm happy.

DeeKay
05-05-2010, 02:44
As far as I see it, there is something that needs to be done to make charges less of a foregone conclusion. Since faster moving units such as flyers and cavalry can pretty much guarantee a charge if a player knows what he or she is doing, I think there needs to be a factor that.. throws a spanner in the works.

I'm not against the rumoured variable charge range but it does seem too dicey (for want of a better term). Why roll a dice for it? Why not have a quick reshuffle of how movement is done, so that 1) players dice off for movement priority 2) players declare charges 3) rally fleeing units 4) player A moves his charging units 5 player B moves his charges. In that way, you retain the importance of manoeuver whilst making counter-attacks much more responsive.

In LotR in general, the best part (and I think GW have picked up on this) is that nothing is left entirely in one person's hands. The opposing player can always do something to react, and has the ability to do so quickly rather than waiting for his turn to do something.

So it is that I look forward to 8th ed with cautious optimism. I shall not pass judgement until I have read, re-read, then broken the rules set.

With regards,
Dan.

Skyth
05-05-2010, 03:34
Charges are not automatic in 7th. Unless you are playing against a unit that is ITP.

Charges are pretty much completely decided by the actions of the two players.

I do wonder how charge reactions are going to play into random charge ranges if they in fact do exist.

I. Nailo
05-05-2010, 07:28
I do wonder how charge reactions are going to play into random charge ranges if they in fact do exist.

A valid point, and not just regarding charge reactions.

Everyone is assessing the random charge distance on its own, without any idea as to how else the rules are changing. They have taken one rumor, isolated it from the rest (and without knowing what is/isn't true), and either condoned it or condemned it.

I'd have to go with what only a few people before me have said: wait for the book to hit shelves, then take the whole thing in as a system.

By itself, random charges might sound great/awful to you, but it may be counter-balanced by other rules changes that have yet to be discovered.

Knuuut
05-05-2010, 07:30
I see that my initial comment made some off you jump to the defense and maybe I went a bit over the line. Sorry if I offended anybody, you have all the rights to be proud off your skills! However:

I understand that some off you wants to be in perfect control over the movement off your troops (Iím an O&G player so this seems very strange to me) but I fail to see the great skill involved in this. If you have played more than 2-3 games you should already be able to judge the distances and know when a charge will fail or not. If you then play an army with superior movement you know from the start of the battle that the movement phase belongs to you. I could pick an all mounted list including some fliers, and know that I will get most off my charges off. Or in the case of infantry with M5 against infantry with M4 you should be able to get the charge off. Again I fail to see the skills involved... The new rule would shake this up a bit and in my opinion make for a more fun and dynamic movement phase opposite todayís static and predictable phase.

If the movement rumor is true it will be M value + D3 for troops with 3-6M and you will also get a re-roll of the D3 dice if the unit has a standard. This is not what I consider totally random and you will still be almost in full control. A M3 will not be able to charge a M6 if they face off against each other no matter what and that is how it should be. The same could be said about cavalry vs. infantry. It will only make the movement phase between troops of almost the same M value a bit more exiting and less predictable(M3 vs. M4 Ė yes, although the M4 still have the advantage ; M3 vs. M5 Ė there is a chance but probably not ; M3 vs. M6 Ė not a chance)

Regarding the O&G army: If going by the prophets of doom on this forum saying they will quit warhammer if the new movement rule (amongst other things) is true, itís just a wonder how the O&G army survived the transition to the 7th as that made them even more random and less competitive. I didnít like it and I bet a lot of other people as well, but we had to adjust and get moving. And itís still one of the most popular armies around, just goes to show how important the fluff of a game can be and not just the rules. And I understand that this army is not for everyone, just mentioned them to show that GamesWorkshop is not totally convinced that the movement phase should be all M values against each other without any randomness involved.

My point being that we all have to adapt to the new rules and make the best off it. As with every edition there will be some controversy but I really think they are on to something with this edition. You have to remember that your opponent is playing by the same rules and that should at least give you some comfort.

Dungeon_Lawyer
05-05-2010, 07:36
This is a rather ignorant way to summarize it.

:wtf:

Stay classy.



But for now I'm being optimistic
But not classy?

Tarliyn
05-05-2010, 07:43
My point being that we all have to adapt to the new rules and make the best off it. As with every edition there will be some controversy but I really think they are on to something with this edition. You have to remember that your opponent is playing by the same rules and that should at least give you some comfort.

So we are both playing by the same un-fun, often times frustrating, and silly rule. How is that supposed to make me feel better again?

Knuuut
05-05-2010, 07:54
"A dwarf being able to charge an elf? How absurd! This goes against everything warhammer stands for! *Throws the new rulebook in the trash* I rather stick with the 7 edition with it's bulletproof system of rules. At least I can use my superior skills based on the M value Games Workshop have decided to give my troops along with the ItP i'm relying on so everything goes as planned"

Pokpoko
05-05-2010, 08:25
To anyone overly concerned about the supposed "dumbing down" of movement phase:
Notice that the whole "intricate manouvering" in WFB and the importance of side/rearcharges comes SOLELY from the mechanical rule giving boost in CR to such attacks, nothing more. Since the rule remains, the only thing that changes is that the gamer will actually spend less time measuring irrelevant things like wheeling ranges when all that really matters is moving from point A to point B. In short- it is only important to get to the position allowing favourable charge, not HOW you get there. The units could move by farting over terrain, and it would change nothing in how important flank and rearcharge is and how well you must place the unit to aquire said charge.

Shimmergloom
05-05-2010, 08:51
In 6th edition, I was the only greenskin player around. Everyone told me, they'd never seen greenskin armies. No one played them.

The more I played, it generated interest in other players to take up greenskins. Then some would read the book and say, it's just too random. Could be fun sometimes, but just not fun enough to spend the money on.

Then 7th came, and people who had greenskin armies put away from years gone by, tried playing them again.

The 7th greenskin book was 100 times more random than the 6th book. It was quickly known to be unplayable in terms of trying a real strategy or tactical playstyle.

So most of those players disappeared quickly.

Now everything that players dislike about greenskins. The extreme randomness, is being added to the main game.

I don't know what's more hilarious in GW's thinking. Take a game system Lotr/Wotr that is apparently SO popular and SO good that I've never seen a single person play it in 5 years(I didn't play from late 2000 to early 2005) and couple that with what has the consensus of being the WORST 7th edition book.

Way to go.

Darkspear
05-05-2010, 08:57
In a dice-based game I have to call bull---- here. As Ozorik eloquently stated, the game is about maximizing your luck. Random charges won't change this, although they will change how you go about effecting it.


You should probably find another game, then, as armylist building is the #1 determinant of success at the moment.

.


I disagree on this. Tactics is the #1 determinant of success. An effective use of a weak unit can still destroy a strong unit in fantasy. I feel that reliance on one's army list is the characteristic of a 2nd class general.

bert n ernie
05-05-2010, 09:10
I, like some other people don't like the idea of a random movement rule. I'm not too upset, I'm just not particularly keen.
The real worry I have is that it will make the game longer, because you'll have to roll more dice, and it will lengthen my own personal game, as when I am taking into account known quantities like a solid M value it takes me much less time to decide on one option than when i have to take into account unknown quantities (like number of kills I'll should get on the charge).
There are reason to not like the rule, but the biggest one to me is that it's a waste of time, especially with a horde or MSU army.

willowdark
05-05-2010, 12:40
And this was one of the big complaints of 7th - that a single roll could have such a big effect and even autodestroy units. This is solidly rumoured to be changed in 8th. Feels like two steps forward, one step back in that regard...

One thing that's been not much talked about is that if you are withing move+1" then there's no risk of failure.

The only solid rumour is that autobreak is going, which is good, but I haven't seen anything about whether or not you'll still need to take a Fear test in order to charge.

But still a valid point, and worth waiting for the true context.

About the M+1 point. The problem I see with that is that I'll now have to guard against both the possibility that I'll roll badly _and_ the possibility that the enemy will roll well. If getting within M+1 means I'm exposed to M+12, setting up charges will be that much more difficult, and slow units will be at the mercy of fast units even more than they are now, which is already pretty severe.

Again, it's a matter of imposing randomness on an aspect of the game that is currently completely in the players hands - a bad fix to a system that wasn't broken.

Avatar of the Eldar
05-05-2010, 14:53
To anyone overly concerned about the supposed "dumbing down" of movement phase:
Notice that the whole "intricate manouvering" in WFB and the importance of side/rearcharges comes SOLELY from the mechanical rule giving boost in CR to such attacks, nothing more. Since the rule remains, the only thing that changes is that the gamer will actually spend less time measuring irrelevant things like wheeling ranges when all that really matters is moving from point A to point B. In short- it is only important to get to the position allowing favourable charge, not HOW you get there. The units could move by farting over terrain, and it would change nothing in how important flank and rearcharge is and how well you must place the unit to aquire said charge.

Hear! Hear! Well put.

Balerion
05-05-2010, 16:28
I, like some other people don't like the idea of a random movement rule. I'm not too upset, I'm just not particularly keen.
The real worry I have is that it will make the game longer, because you'll have to roll more dice, and it will lengthen my own personal game, as when I am taking into account known quantities like a solid M value it takes me much less time to decide on one option than when i have to take into account unknown quantities (like number of kills I'll should get on the charge).
There are reason to not like the rule, but the biggest one to me is that it's a waste of time, especially with a horde or MSU army.
Yes, you may have to tack on 5 seconds per move to roll a dice, but you're forgetting that performing the movement will be much quicker if you're not required to account for wheeling, turning, etc.

bert n ernie
05-05-2010, 21:17
Yes, you may have to tack on 5 seconds per move to roll a dice, but you're forgetting that performing the movement will be much quicker if you're not required to account for wheeling, turning, etc.

Ha! Thanks. I forgot about that.
The only down side now being that I actually liked the wheeling and turning :(. I'm willing to give this a shot, but I have no idea until there are at least a few more solid facts as opposed to rumours.

Lord Inquisitor
05-05-2010, 21:25
Well, wheeling and turning are both horrible mechanically.

Wheeling is extrodinarily difficult to measure accurately. There are those nice little Gale Force Nine aids but they become inaccurate if you aren't using a standard movement tray. Now, most of the time it isn't necessary to be THAT accurate and it can be reasonably accurately done by 1/2" increments but that's pretty time consuming or more usually by bending a tape, which is also inaccurate.

Turning is also a can of worms - it is often incorrectly done (by moving the movement tray around rather than each individual model turning) but actually turning a unit is horribly time consuming if you actually turn each model around, annoying if next turn you'll just increase ranks again back to your original formation and downright confusing if you only turn some of the models.

There's certainly something to be said for simplifying maneuvering. However, I'm not sure any rumours have actually suggested that this may be changed - is this purely extrapolation from War of the Ring?

big squig
06-05-2010, 04:49
I'm all for simplifying the movement phase. Fantasy's current movement rules are unwieldy and greatly open to abuse. Every time you wheel, turn, reface, fallback, or realign a unit you end up mis-measuring by a partial inch. Think about how many times you do a complex move in fantasy. By the end of the game, both sides have over-moved or under-moved several inches in total.

Would I have added random movement if I were GW? No, prolly not. I think simplifying the turning/refacing rules would had been enough. But, I'm not really against the idea of random movement. War is unpredictable, especially during ancient times. It was nigh impossible to communicate on the battlefield with all the noise and dirt kicked up. How motivated troops are isn't really something you can measure, and there's no way a general is going to have total control of everyone. That's what a unit's personal command is for, and I like that having things like champions, musicians, and standard bearers is going to give you more control over your random movement. It's cool that command will actually be used to command and communicate.

I also like the risk/reward. 40K is the same way. People say in 40k you just roll dice and its totally random who wins, but it's not. It's about stacking the advantages so into your favor that even the dice can't go against you. If you're worried that you will lose an important charge just because you didn't roll a six, then don't let yourself get in that situation.

Sloeberjong
06-05-2010, 07:30
I'm all for simplifying the movement phase. Fantasy's current movement rules are unwieldy and greatly open to abuse. Every time you wheel, turn, reface, fallback, or realign a unit you end up mis-measuring by a partial inch. Think about how many times you do a complex move in fantasy. By the end of the game, both sides have over-moved or under-moved several inches in total.

Would I have added random movement if I were GW? No, prolly not. I think simplifying the turning/refacing rules would had been enough. But, I'm not really against the idea of random movement. War is unpredictable, especially during ancient times. It was nigh impossible to communicate on the battlefield with all the noise and dirt kicked up. How motivated troops are isn't really something you can measure, and there's no way a general is going to have total control of everyone. That's what a unit's personal command is for, and I like that having things like champions, musicians, and standard bearers is going to give you more control over your random movement. It's cool that command will actually be used to command and communicate.

I also like the risk/reward. 40K is the same way. People say in 40k you just roll dice and its totally random who wins, but it's not. It's about stacking the advantages so into your favor that even the dice can't go against you. If you're worried that you will lose an important charge just because you didn't roll a six, then don't let yourself get in that situation.

I totally agree with this post (except the 40k part, but that's another discussion), especially the highlighted parts...

Simple rules don't necessarily create a simple game and the movement rules for WHFB are pretty cumbersome right now without it really needing to be. It's not THAT hard to get a regiment somewhere...besides, the infantry could use a boost.

At first I thought the random movement idea was kinda iffy...but it could indeed be to "simulate" battlefield tactics and it would be nice if command models would actually have an effect on it.

So in all, more streamlined rules for movement would be a good thing for WHFB IMO.

defunct
06-05-2010, 07:57
About the negativity towards randomness...

Truly skilled generals have the ability to adapt when things don't go the way they initially planned.
That's how I see it.

bert n ernie
06-05-2010, 08:05
Yes, and when it comes to how your unit works in combat and so on that is fine. However when you add in more and more random factors, instead of the truly skilled general winning the day it leans more towards the general with better luck winning the day.
If every enemy charge makes it in, even when the odds are against it, and few of yours does it doesn't matter what you planned for, you'll probably still loose.

yabbadabba
06-05-2010, 08:10
I'm all for simplifying the movement phase. Fantasy's current movement rules are unwieldy and greatly open to abuse. Every time you wheel, turn, reface, fallback, or realign a unit you end up mis-measuring by a partial inch. Think about how many times you do a complex move in fantasy. By the end of the game, both sides have over-moved or under-moved several inches in total. Several inches is an over-exaggeration, but can happen if you are not paying attention. If you are regularly going up against players who abuse the movement rules that much, you either need to sharpen up your game management or find new players.
An inch or two, which is far more realistic, has a lot less impact than you might think. The problems are far more to do with the players than the rules. Playing with WAB these issues of movement are far less an issue, and the new rules have added more options.


Would I have added random movement if I were GW? No, prolly not. I think simplifying the turning/refacing rules would had been enough. But, I'm not really against the idea of random movement. War is unpredictable, especially during ancient times. It was nigh impossible to communicate on the battlefield with all the noise and dirt kicked up. How motivated troops are isn't really something you can measure, and there's no way a general is going to have total control of everyone. That's what a unit's personal command is for, and I like that having things like champions, musicians, and standard bearers is going to give you more control over your random movement. It's cool that command will actually be used to command and communicate. You can't bring any reality into this, as WFB is such an abstract system any relation to reality is almost comical. I agree that there should be an option for more involvement of the command group in the game though.

Oh, and Luck is when opportunity and skill combine.

Crovax20
06-05-2010, 08:14
I really don't get the whining about random charges either. It seems all these players are the sort that will avoid any confrontation untill they know the odds that they will win combat are favourable and then they charge in.

I for one like the random charging as it will mean a couple of things:
1. Races with a lower M value get a reasonable chance to charge
2. Battlefield conditions hardly make a fixed charge movement realistic
3. Command groups actually have a roll to play in the movement phase.

The detractors are only worried that their carefully set up out of charge range of the opponent unit now might not make it and get charged themselves. Yes that is a bad change if you always relied on using your superior base M value to win you the game by getting charges.

But remember chargers striking first is going out of the window, there will be 2 ranks that attack always if you have sufficient models, the chargers get +1 CR which with 2 ranks attacking is only a modest bonus. And you can still use your superior movement to try and manouevre yourself into favourable postions on the battlefield before committing to a charge. If we take all these changes into account, we realize that superior troops will most likely still beat the crap out of lesser troops.

mdauben
06-05-2010, 14:14
It seems all these players are the sort that will avoid any confrontation untill they know the odds that they will win combat are favourable and then they charge in.
I thought that was called being a good general? Not commiting your troops unless you are confident that they will win. You would have to be either desparate or foolish to throw your units into combat that you didn't think they would win. :rolleyes:

Crovax20
06-05-2010, 14:22
Problem being that m5 armies make it practically impossible for m4 armies to do the same :)

Lord Inquisitor
06-05-2010, 14:26
I really don't get the whining about random charges either. It seems all these players are the sort that will avoid any confrontation untill they know the odds that they will win combat are favourable and then they charge in.
Yes. It's called "good tactics." Otherwise the game is decided by dice or who has the best armylist. [edit: ninja'd!]

I have to echo the above post though... If chargers striking first is out the window, and charging only provides +1CR, then charging becomes much less important. Sitting on a hill (assuming hills still provide +1CR) and waiting for a charge is a valid tactic. Not as good as charging yourself, perhaps, but still, it isn't going to be a big deal. Unless you lose combat by 1 of course!

It's still important for things like heavy cavalry and soforth, but for basic units or monsters, charging just isn't that vital anymore. Plus with the other rumours - for example, full command giving you M+D6+1 with a re-roll on the dice - that's a 8/9 probability of getting an 8" or more charge with M4 troops. There's a big difference between a random D6 charge and one with a re-roll. Units without commands are going to be penalised, but for the majority of units, it isn't going to be that random if the rumoured command bonuses are true. Cavalry, for example, are slated to be 3D6-pick-the-two-highest. That's a pretty good average (no idea how to calculate it!) and if they get the same rumoured command bonuses then you should be able to predict pretty well how far they're going as a realistic minimum. Of course, that triple-1 roll could come along and ruin your day, but it's improbable enough to be lumped in with things like losing your greater daemon to a miscast...

yabbadabba
06-05-2010, 14:26
Disagree Crovax. Tatics and troop selection can make a huge difference and make even M3 troops compete

willowdark
06-05-2010, 14:33
I'd also like to reiterate that my CoKs have Stupidity. Random charges means I'l have to roll well on two seperate rolls to successfully charge into combat. And a single failed charged turns a 200 pt hammer into a huge 300 pt liability. CoKs are terrible in combat on any turn they don't charge.

That is a ruined unit right there.

Balerion
06-05-2010, 16:19
I have to echo the above post though... If chargers striking first is out the window, and charging only provides +1CR, then charging becomes much less important. Sitting on a hill (assuming hills still provide +1CR) and waiting for a charge is a valid tactic. Not as good as charging yourself, perhaps, but still, it isn't going to be a big deal. Unless you lose combat by 1 of course!

Not if there's an objective you need to claim...

willowdark
06-05-2010, 16:28
Knights with lances will still need the charge, as will Fast Cav with Spears, for the strength bonus.

Overrun, as well.

Lord Inquisitor
06-05-2010, 17:30
Not if there's an objective you need to claim...
Indeed, although that's perhaps a scenario where it's even more important to move up and sit on the objective, even if it should result in you taking the charge...

Still not sure about objectives in Fantasy mind. A greater variety in scenarios is one thing, but "objectives" that need to be held seems far more at home in a futuristic or modern setting. Historically, battles were typically fought on fields with no objective other than to destroy the enemy and most fantasy fiction/film follows suit.


Knights with lances will still need the charge, as will Fast Cav with Spears, for the strength bonus.

Overrun, as well.
True - there's still a point to charging, and I would be most unhappy if there wasn't. But the point is that it's less important - and with less reward for charging, there's less risk associated with the random movement...

mrtn
06-05-2010, 17:31
I don't have a problem with random charge ranges, and I'd love to throw the wheeling rules out. They're clunky as hell and don't bring anything to my enjoyment of the game.

Crovax20
06-05-2010, 18:28
I'd also like to reiterate that my CoKs have Stupidity. Random charges means I'l have to roll well on two seperate rolls to successfully charge into combat. And a single failed charged turns a 200 pt hammer into a huge 300 pt liability. CoKs are terrible in combat on any turn they don't charge.

That is a ruined unit right there.

Its one of the risks of riding on a stupid beast.

I guess you will just have to learn to flank units instead of charging straight in the front.

SamVimes
06-05-2010, 18:42
I don't have a problem with random charge ranges, and I'd love to throw the wheeling rules out. They're clunky as hell and don't bring anything to my enjoyment of the game.

QFT. I've become lazy in my gaming I guess, but a looser system that still works is a better system for my enjoyment, especially if it'll carve 10-20 minutes off a game.

willowdark
06-05-2010, 18:43
It's possible to fail a charge to the flank and get flanked yourself. Sucks, don't it, especially when, barring Insane Courage, that flank charge would've broke the unit and you could count on the pursue to get you out of flank danger.

And flanking with CoK is already extremely difficult because, well, they're Stupid.

They're taking a big hit, and your sarcasm doesn't contribute to a reasonable discussion, or refute a valid point.

yabbadabba
06-05-2010, 19:04
They're taking a big hit, and your sarcasm doesn't contribute to a reasonable discussion, or refute a valid point. Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, unless you have a copy of the new rulebook right in front of you. They are not taking a big hit, they might be taking a hit - this is all based on rumour and that is it. Throwing teddies out of the pram is pointless.

Ozorik
06-05-2010, 19:04
It's possible to fail a charge to the flank and get flanked yourself. Sucks, don't it, especially when, barring Insane Courage, that flank charge would've broke the unit and you could count on the pursue to get you out of flank danger.


Just as its possible to fail a frontal charge and get flank charged in return.


And flanking with CoK is already extremely difficult because, well, they're Stupid.


They are also LD 9


They're taking a big hit, and your sarcasm doesn't contribute to a reasonable discussion, or refute a valid point.



They aren't taking a big hit, they are taking a small hit. As this 'hit' is shared by every other unit in the game its hardly worth singling out specific units which will suddenly become 'useless'.

Lord Inquisitor
06-05-2010, 19:05
On the other hand, if you DO get the charge then at least the riders have a stupidly high initiative, so they'll be going first and that +1CR actually makes them nastier on the charge than they are now - that's one more point closer to breaking a unit by a frontal charge!

So... harder to get the charge off, but with more static combat res. It should also be noted that while it is possible to get a lower charge range, the average result (assuming 3D6 pick 2 highest rumour is true) is actually further than their charge range is now! The probability of rolling less than 7 is (if my maths are correct) 10.2%. So there's a 90% chance your cold ones will charge as far, if not further than before. If the rumour that command groups will give you +1" and a re-roll, that drops to about half of one percent.

So it could well be that in actual fact there's a 99.5% chance your cold ones will actually charge just as far if not further each time they charge, together with the idea that they'll gain ItP due to being Fear causers and the rumour of less armour modifiers, I'd say they're actually more viable than before.

But on the other hand, if you want to, say, give me all your cold one knights because they're about to be nerfed, I'd be happy take them off your hands ... ;)

willowdark
06-05-2010, 19:10
Well, since LM Cold One Riders are the only other Stupid Heavy cav in the game, LM are the only ones sharing this hit. Not marching will make every failed Stupidity check that much worse, and having to pass both the Check and counting on rolling well to get into combat will make CoK close to the most unreliable unit in the game, especially since LM have Cold Blooded.

And Ld 9 is still one failed test on average every game, so taking an extra turn to make sure you're in reliable charge range is only putting you in further risk of failing that Stupidity check next turn.

If Stupidity doesn't change, it will compoud the nerfs to heavy cav and the variability of random charges more for CoK than any other unit in the game. Yes, this will make CoK extremely unreliable. Maybe not useless, but pretty damn close.

Edit: Ninja'd by Lord Inquisitor with several very good points.

This is the one thing I've been concerned about, but I think at this point I would rather just wait and see the book.

SamVimes
06-05-2010, 19:21
There are going to be some casualties to 8th edition (just like any edition change) , and CoK may be one of them. But, more than likely, there will be a far greater number of options that become useful, making the trade-off a good one.

Lord Inquisitor
06-05-2010, 19:24
I hate to say we should wait for the book - I always maintain that extrapolating from bare-bone rumours is half the fun of Warseer - but I think the enviroment that the random charge rule is in will make a huge difference.

Having thought about it, I'm more concerned about mega-charges. I mean, those Cold Ones have a relatively short 14" charge but assuming the same command rumours, there's a 7% chance of a maximum 20" charge. That's quite a bit more...

Interestingly, one effect that static charges has is to make differences in Movement values smaller. After all, M8 is 2" more than M7 for most purposes. But under the new rules it will be only 1" difference and a musician may make 1" difference alone...

Balerion
07-05-2010, 05:17
I hate to say we should wait for the book - I always maintain that extrapolating from bare-bone rumours is half the fun of Warseer - but I think the enviroment that the random charge rule is in will make a huge difference.
Hear hear!

I sometimes feel like a hypocrite for telling people, "calm down, they're just rumours" and simultaneously spending posts and posts debating the value of those rumours.

But that's the name of the game. :D

VonUber
07-05-2010, 08:34
I like fantasy for back ground, models and the system, I got into the hobby because you could have a psychotic dark elf sorceress riding a big dragon kicking ass and nuking things! it looked awsome, and big monsters. Now i play it because its a good wargame and its not boring... like flames of war... god that was more boring than LOTR's stratergy battle xD

But fantasy going more like war of the ring is a bad idea, quite allot of people dislike war of the ring, it was a half baked idea to try and save the lord of the rings minatures they invested in...

Dungeon_Lawyer
07-05-2010, 09:25
Yes, and when it comes to how your unit works in combat and so on that is fine. However when you add in more and more random factors, instead of the truly skilled general winning the day it leans more towards the general with better luck winning the day.
If every enemy charge makes it in, even when the odds are against it, and few of yours does it doesn't matter what you planned for, you'll probably still loose.

But in another game it will be YOU pulling off the amazing charge and your enemy sputtering over "terrain" or "mutiny" and it will be your forces taking the field and the day.

Win some lose some--Be like water, adapt.

All I want to know is if unseenlurker makes into the new edition- If so I see alot of players shifting their magic phases over to the lore of shadows

Bilmengar
07-05-2010, 10:19
If every enemy charge makes it in, even when the odds are against it, and few of yours does it doesn't matter what you planned for, you'll probably still loose.

Well, if the enemy passes all his 6+-Armour Saves and you fail all of your 1+Saves, the result is probably the same. Hasn't stopped that many players so far...

Spiney Norman
07-05-2010, 11:25
One of the rumours I have heard (not on the internet) was the possibility of the Magic Phase occurring before movement or at the same time as movement. Similar to WotR. The proposed intention for such was that the player who went first wasn't immediately in range with all his magic missiles and spells...

I've heard the possibility of magic occurring before movement a while ago from a semi-reliable source, but the rumour hasn't really surfaced again so I'm not sure what to make of it. My greenskin wizards would be very happy about having the opportunity to cast spells before their animosity roll though ;)

As for magic being lumped together with movement, I really hope this isn't true. Currently magic is an integral part of the game, if they were to sideline it in the way it is in WotR then I can't see anyone bothering to take wizards in 8th. Wizards are already looking like they will be pretty over-priced for what they do with the rumour that dispel potential will no longer be tied to the wizard, if casting is nerfed into irrelevance as well theres no way I'm going to be paying 500pts for a Slann in any size game.

There would also be major issues with TK magic if the magic phase didn't exist, they'd have to completely alter how the incantations work right away otherwise TK would have no magic.


Charges are not automatic in 7th. Unless you are playing against a unit that is ITP.

Charges are pretty much completely decided by the actions of the two players.

I do wonder how charge reactions are going to play into random charge ranges if they in fact do exist.

Interesting on that point about charge reactions, it lends even more power to shooting units as they'll be able to s&s at unit that wont even make it to them half of the time, potentially giving them another couple of rounds of shooting for free.

bert n ernie
07-05-2010, 12:23
But in another game it will be YOU pulling off the amazing charge and your enemy sputtering over "terrain" or "mutiny" and it will be your forces taking the field and the day.

Win some lose some--Be like water, adapt.
[/COLOR][/FONT]
You've actually backed up my point there. I should repeat: I do not want to lose or win due to luck. This would be winning due to luck, and would be equally unenjoyable. Anyone who has had their army book re-released and then played someone new will probably know what I mean. I do not want my opponent to complain that my book was too powerful, nor do I want to suffer through the extremities of his bad luck, thus never seeing which of us is the better general.




Well, if the enemy passes all his 6+-Armour Saves and you fail all of your 1+Saves, the result is probably the same. Hasn't stopped that many players so far...

The two things are very similar when I think about it. That doesn't mean that adding a second level of randomness to combats and charges adds anything useful to the game whatsoever. All it means is that there is another opportunity for things to happen in a random way.
In addition what you are suggesting should be far less likely to happen than varied random movement. Random movement would hinge on 1-3 dice rolls, leaving little room to as regularly roll the average. What you are describing could easily take 15 or more rolls per player.
I do agree, that is the only difference, but it is not one I like at the moment(from what I know currently:) ).

mdauben
07-05-2010, 14:42
Well, if the enemy passes all his 6+-Armour Saves and you fail all of your 1+Saves, the result is probably the same. Hasn't stopped that many players so far...
People keep bringing up this lame argument as a justification for the new random charge rule. Yes one random element does not destroy the game. However, as you yourself pointed out this is not the first or only random element in the game. If rumors are true, they are adding yet another random element to a game that some players already feel has too many random elements. :rolleyes:

Random charges alone do not ruin the game, but for some long time players they may just be the straw that breaks the camels back. :(

RichBlake
07-05-2010, 17:23
I would like to point something out:

3D6 charge range is random. It is random every time you roll the dice because it can pick any combination of the three dice.

X+1D6 is variable, not random. This is because there is a gaurenteed minimum that is actually useful and yet there is a maximum which is very useful too.

Thats how i view it anyway.

Morthak
07-05-2010, 17:30
The worst thing they could do to the 8th edition taken from wotr is releasing the FAQ more than a year after the release. So calm down about the charges, and stay positive!

bert n ernie
07-05-2010, 19:30
I would like to point something out:

3D6 charge range is random. It is random every time you roll the dice because it can pick any combination of the three dice.

X+1D6 is variable, not random. This is because there is a gaurenteed minimum that is actually useful and yet there is a maximum which is very useful too.

Thats how i view it anyway.

I understand the terms you're using, but not what you mean.
I don't see how a number between 2 and 12(three dice, pick the highest two, if that's how it works) is random, while a number between 2 and 6 is a variable. They're both the same.
In what way did you want to relate that to the discussion, because I don't quite get it.


@mdauben, in my case I don't think it will be the straw that breaks the camels back, but then I have been looking for a good fantasy mass combat game for a while now as an alternative and possible replacement for fantasy.

Balerion
07-05-2010, 20:13
Interesting on that point about charge reactions, it lends even more power to shooting units as they'll be able to s&s at unit that wont even make it to them half of the time, potentially giving them another couple of rounds of shooting for free.
Yes, especially if the new movement rules allow a unit to back up at a faster pace than they are currently able to do.

Certain armies could develop annoying builds (like mass Glade Guard) that invite you to charge them, S&S, fall back, S&S, fall back, S&S, etc.

Lord Inquisitor
07-05-2010, 20:21
Curiously enough, I would have thought that the random charge could hurt such builds... Even if you set up your stand and shoot fairly far away, a lucky roll by a powerful unit could mean the end of your glade guard unit... Particularly if there are re-rolls or modifiers from command groups, it'd be a risky proposition. Plus it rather depends on what happens on a failed charge and what the caveats on moving or marching are - if the unit actually moves its full charge distance, for example, this tactic wouldn't work more than once. Of course, the glade guard could bait, S&S and then charge next turn...

I. Nailo
07-05-2010, 20:44
I've got four words for you people:
Middle of the Road.

As in: everyone is assuming that you'll roll really well/poorly with this new random element. The thing is, the law of averages comes into play. I know full well that there will be bouts of bad rolling, but those of you who pine about how awful this change is act like those bouts will occur every single game.

Let's assume a unit of knights (save 1+ or 2+, doesn't matter in this example) charges a core unit with HW=Shield (so 4+ or 5+ save, depending on armor). How often will it happen that all of the lance/spear attacks from the knight will fail to kill any/enough models, and the HW+Shield unit will get to strike back and win combat? How often do charging knights fail to hit and/or wound the enemy enough to knock out their front rank? How likely is it that the knights will fail enough armor saves, or the core unit will pass any/all of theirs? Even with a flank/rear charge, what's the likelyhood of the knights losing combat?

In the example above, it does happen. Does that mean it's going to happen every time? No. If you set up the charge properly and get most/all of your knights into the fray, how likely is it this will happen? Not very. Does it happen? Yes.

I'm just trying to point out that there are plenty of examples of things that "could" happen, but regularly don't. If you set up your charges well, more than likely you will make it into melee. If the random charge range rumor is true, why not the rumor about command groups? And if that's the case, you'll get an extra 1", and get to re-roll the dice if you don't like the results. I play 40K, and I can't tell you how many times a twin-linked weapon has saved my butt! (for those who don't play/know, twin-linked lets you re-roll the to-hit dice on a ranged attack... same mechanic, basically)

Anyhow, we all just need to settle down and wait to see what the final rules are. We don't even know which rumors are true, and which are wishful thinking. I don't personally mind the random charge range, and I understand that there are people who do... but it's not worth arguing over if it turns out to be false.

Lord Inquisitor
07-05-2010, 21:10
While the "law of averages" may apply over a great many games, the point is that there are usually a few really key charges in a game. This can leave real dissatisfaction when such an important factor is left to a single dice roll. A big factor is whether it is a single dice roll or more - 1D6 is very variable, while 3D6-pick-two-highest is pretty reliable for a decent score.

The point is that the law of averages doesn't apply to a single roll, and when that roll can be pivotal in the game, well, that feels like skill has been replaced by randomness. Even if you've stacked the odds in your favour, rolling three ones, however improbable, could wreck a perfect battleplan. You might have made the same decision in 215 other games and been right about it, but today Lady Luck just kicked you in the nuts.

Of course, there are many other places in the game that this can happen, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea to introduce more game-critical single-dice rolls... It may well be that there are games where the random charge really doesn't change things that much - but it's the extreme cases that stand out.

Trying to be positive, what's good about random charges? I'll tell you one thing ... the "stand off" between units of different move values will disappear because move won't be so predictable. Unit A (M5) moves to 8.5" away from Unit B (M4). Unit B knows it can't charge, so moves 2" backwards (turn, move, turn) out of Unit A's charge range. Unit A moves forward 2" and the cycle repeats. With random charges this won't happen as unit B might still be able to charge 9" if they go for it...

I can't think of much else that's good... Certainly there'll be a skill in moving your units to M+1" before charging.

Hellfury
07-05-2010, 22:01
About the negativity towards randomness...

Truly skilled generals have the ability to adapt when things don't go the way they initially planned.
That's how I see it.

Thats called strategy.

Its amazing how many people in this thread mistake tactics for strategy and vice versa.

Strategy = overall plan and how you roll with the punches.

Tactics = how that plan is implemented to gain the objective.

They are however correct in saying that more randomness reduces tactics. Its just a fact.

What I am observing mostly is people having kneejerk reactions to being forced to build new strategies with the armies they have. In essence an inflexible attitude towards a flexible game.

I think it is safe to discount posters who make such blanket statements that essentially amount to "If I wanted to play WOTR I would, I play fantasy because I like how the rules are at the current edition. If the rules are going to be this drastic then I'm going to quit." as one poster early on the first page said. They aren't going to be happy with any changes whatsoever so no amount of explaining will assuage their ire.

Fact of the matter is this. GW dont care what you think of their games because they know you will keep buying their crap. They want the rules just good enough so that you will play it, but bad enough (read: flexible and quite a bit ambiguous) so that they can continue to make changes so that you will buy more models when they amend rules. Again, this is fact and plain as the nose on your face. They have gone on record as stating that they make rules to sell miniatures. It doesnt get any plainer than that.

WHFB has a lot of room to improve as a game and some elements from WotR could be used that actually would improve it. WotR is far from a perfect game, so I doubt GW is going to just transfer their WHFB armybooks to fit WotR rules. The games are just too different from that.

Keeping an open mind and not saying "well X is nerfed now. Screw 8th ed" is just a pissy pants attitude and your not seeing the broader spectrum of potential. 8th ed could very well be the worst thing since... well... since GW decided to continue to use outdated mechanics for their games (*coughUGOIGOcough*). But keeping in mind that strategy (as Defunct notes above, the ability to adapt) is the best way to handle this adverse change to the game you have grown so accustomed to and is a sign of a good general.

I am sure this post will draw flames just like other posts in this thread who tried to make pleas for reasonable attitudes and responses. To those people I say, I could care less how you pee your pants.

bert n ernie
07-05-2010, 22:31
@Hell fury.
Yep, there's people who are complaining too much. I agree. However, I disagree about the random movement being a good thing.
I feel my case is fairly well stated(not necessarily by me), but you mentioned a couple of interesting things...

I guess I like to micromanage my game. Sounds silly, but 'the devil in the details' and all that kind of thing. I don't like it when a rule technicality upsets the game for one or both players. I do like the precice movement, guessing, and knowing that I may well miss with every knight attack, but I know I've got them in the flank at this range, so it doesn't matter.
The approach of outmanoeuvring the foe's forces and getting behind his lines(strategy or tactic, I dunno :) ) strongly appeals to me. I guess, for me, the knowledge that these carefully laid plans could not only fail(as in an unlucky combat, which makes me loose) but could also be hampered by the ability of my unit to get there in the first place frustrates me. It could be that once the game starts it is some magic mechanic that fits right in, but I really don't see it. And... I tend to play a lot of games where the average swings all over the place(I dare someone to try play a completely average game) and I just don't feel that the game needs more. The mechanic could work well, despite my misgivings, but it doesn't seem purposeful. It feels like a change in the level of tactics used, for the pure sake of it.
I may not be explaining myself well here. What I'm sure we'd both love, but we'll never see is the removal of 'I go You go'.
Maybe it's not the change in warhammer that's the problem, but the fact that I never feel like I'll get the right mix of tactics and strategy from it. I was initially very hopeful about some of the proposed improvements(and still am) but they don't want a perfect system. I do.

I think I should break up with GW.

VonUber
07-05-2010, 22:45
Lets just say it is 1D6 for infantry, 2D6 select the highest for a standard and a muse gives you a +1.
Dwarfs need to roll a 2+ to get there old charge range,
Humans need to roll a 3+ to get there old charge range,
Elves need to roll a 4+ to get there old charge range,
Ogres need to roll a 5+ to get there old charge range.

I play dark elves, chaos and ogres. Ogres are going to be penalised even more due to this charge rule, espeshaly since there s&m costs a total of 30pts. 50pts if you want a champion (if it does bring a free reform it still isnt worth 20pts for an ogre sized model that can be hit by any cannon ball.)

With dark elves i will need to roll a 4+ on 2Dice select the highest. I should get this. But knowing my luck I wont pass them. ALSO one of my fave tactics is to bait and counter charge, or re direct and counter charge. Thats 110pts or 55pts im spending on the redirection, knowing im going to go 10" makes it worth it, but then if im only going to go 7" its not worth it, its taken a chunk of tactics out to add randomness in.

I. Nailo
07-05-2010, 23:35
Alrighty, as riveting at this conversation has been, I'm out.
Hellfury, you have my respect for a good explanation of the situation. Everyone else... you can continue to beat your heads against each others walls, I'm done.

Cheers,
~I. Nailo

Skyth
08-05-2010, 02:47
. GW dont care what you think of their games .


Once in awhile, they actually do...But it has to be a large outcry. I'm primarily thinking of the Tyranid and instant death FAQ that was quickly reversed.

Also, see also all the complaining about the new Chaos and Dark Angels Codexes...Codexes that came out afterwords have tons of options, etc.

Ozorik
08-05-2010, 08:09
They are however correct in saying that more randomness reduces tactics. Its just a fact.


A variable charge move is not random though, not truly. This is especially the case if command elements grant re-rolls and bonuses. Charges will no longer be guaranteed but this will only enhance the tactical aspect of the game as setting up charges will take more planning.

What will truly damage the tactical aspect of the game is the rumoured dramatic reduction in the effectiveness of charging and the possible strict I order of combat. This will actually make charging a bad tactic for some races, a horrible situation if true.

RichBlake
08-05-2010, 14:33
A variable charge move is not random though, not truly. This is especially the case if command elements grant re-rolls and bonuses. Charges will no longer be guaranteed but this will only enhance the tactical aspect of the game as setting up charges will take more planning.


As I've said before and I'll say again this is what I have to agree with. If you can still have a minimum guaranteed charge range you can just use that, if you want to try and play the odds you can do that too.

You can take care to plan your battle plan as if your opponent will not be taking risks and playing the "minimum range game" but if your opponent decides to go out on a limb and risk the bigger charge ranges then you can be caught off balance. That in it's own right is a tactical consideration.

If you decide that you need to account for the fact your opponent is likely to attempt to use the extra D6 range to go over the minimum you must react to that. This may mean though that you cannot enter your own minimum charge range. This again is a tactical consideration.

All of these are tactical considerations. What if my deep striking unit of terminators in 40K scatters out of place? What if my cannon misfires? What if I fail my focus test in War of the Ring? What if I fail my ammo check in Necromunda?

What to do if something odd and unexpected happens is just as important as what you will do if everything goes right.

I use Steam Tanks, these generate steam points to move. You roll a D6 and add the number (1-5) to that and if the total is over the wounds on the Steam Tank it takes a wound and do nothing. As it has 10 wounds to start with from the get go there is a risk in generating 5 points. If I roll a 6 that means it sits and does nothing AND makes it harder to generate 5 points in the future. Since it moves and charges 3" for every steam point there are benefits to generating 5, 3" worth of benefits in fact. The decision of how many points to generate is a tactical decision in its own right I take every fantasy game. Do I go for the definite charge but risk sitting there and doing nothing? Can I afford to take a wound? Can I afford to waste a turn of possible Stanky goodness? How likely is it that the steam tank will take a wound and do nothing? What will I really get out of risking it?

I take these decisions every game and it makes every game slightly different and every situation calls for me to re-think through my decision process and apply it to a new situation. The chance to kill and enemy vampire general on turn 2 is worth risking the rolling of a 6 as it could defeat my opponents army. Charging a giant is not, as the giant will probably mash me anyway. Charging a cavalry unit with lances before they charge me next turn anyway is worth the risk, charging a unit of skaven slaves is not.

Compare this to my friend who plays with his cold one knights. In nearly every game he moves forward very specific measurements. Sure he's thought about it before, in quite some detail, but now every game he just basically does the same thing. Move so you're in range but they aren't or move so that should they move forward they will be in range.




What will truly damage the tactical aspect of the game is the rumoured dramatic reduction in the effectiveness of charging and the possible strict I order of combat. This will actually make charging a bad tactic for some races, a horrible situation if true.

Yes I'm not sure about this. I order works in 40K as there are relatively few bonuses for actually charging and combat, while brutal, generally can be outweighed by the fact that should your uber CC unit get into the midst of my army they can (now) be shot to pieces by my 360 true line of sight shooting army. Also the +1 attack in 40K means often even if you think you'll lose combat it can be advantageous to charge your opponent if thats only what they were going to do anyway. Better you get the +1 A then they do.

In fantasy I order would mean units such as Empire State Troops would rarely get to go first, even if they charged. This combined with the fact due to ranking in Fantasy it's a lot easier to deny your opponent attacks back would mean that the common scene would be similar to when State Troops get charged now (i.e. front ranks die, no attacks back, flee) but that would also apply when THEY charge. Plus as there is no additional attack for charging (as far as we know) there will really be no reason to charge. +1 to combat res really wouldn't be enough to offset the fact that you're striking last imo.

I think charging being a bad tactic for certain units isn't a bad idea (High Elf Spearmen currently fight in three ranks striking first if charged or 2 ranks striking first if not charged for example) as it can represent that its a unit designed to receive a charge. This should really only be for units like Spearmen though, which are clearly defensive in nature.

kyuzo
08-05-2010, 15:55
Keeping an open mind and not saying "well X is nerfed now. Screw 8th ed" is just a pissy pants attitude and your not seeing the broader spectrum of potential. 8th ed could very well be the worst thing since... well... since GW decided to continue to use outdated mechanics for their games (*coughUGOIGOcough*). But keeping in mind that strategy (as Defunct notes above, the ability to adapt) is the best way to handle this adverse change to the game you have grown so accustomed to and is a sign of a good general.

This has nothing to do with whether or not you can adapt to these changes, but the fact that this is a pointless unneeded change.

Oh and only your tactics will have to adapt to these changes.... your strategic goals will remain the same throughout the battle.

Balerion
08-05-2010, 16:36
Oh and only your tactics will have to adapt to these changes.... your strategic goals will remain the same throughout the battle.
No they won't, because 8th is apparently bringing in objective-based missions.

Ozorik
08-05-2010, 17:06
but the fact that this is a pointless unneeded change.


Its not unneeded; set charge ranges currently lead to conservative play, as anyone who has seen two battle lines shuffling around each other can attest.

kyuzo
08-05-2010, 17:23
Its not unneeded; set charge ranges currently lead to conservative play, as anyone who has seen two battle lines shuffling around each other can attest.

That is how it should be. The greatest battles have always been determined before the fights have engaged. War is fought with the mind.


No they won't, because 8th is apparently bringing in objective-based missions

If anything this pretty much just reinstated what I said :confused:

Balerion
08-05-2010, 17:34
Not really. You said that the changes would only impact your tactical decisions. However, everything in combination may effect the overall game to the point where your strategic goals are vastly different from what they are now, and charging isn't such a priority.

kyuzo
08-05-2010, 18:20
Not really. You said that the changes would only impact your tactical decisions. However, everything in combination may effect the overall game to the point where your strategic goals are vastly different from what they are now, and charging isn't such a priority.

Strategic goals alter every single game. They are not static :/

Ozorik
08-05-2010, 19:09
That is how it should be. The greatest battles have always been determined before the fights have engaged.

They werent fought by shuffling forwards and backwards a couple of inches though were they.

Pokpoko
08-05-2010, 19:59
But shuffling forward is so exciting, that's why WFB out-sells 40k by an order of magnitude!

No, wait, it isn't...

GodlessM
08-05-2010, 20:56
Well this is an entertaining thread. What I see is the people who play WHFB the most arguing against random charging, and the people who play WoTR the most often arguing for random charging. Funny how all the other stuff the OP mentioned was for the most part overlooked.

Ozorik
08-05-2010, 21:18
Most of the OP's WotR comparisons are not rumoured to be part of 8th ed, only random charges is strongly rumoured.

For the record I have only played WotR once and I am in favour of random charge ranges. Perhaps its more a question of people with broader gaming experience being in favour of flexible charge ranges.

Dungeon_Lawyer
08-05-2010, 22:03
Perhaps its more a question of people with broader gaming experience being in favour of flexible charge ranges.

Yeah that must be it-We who hate the idea of random charges are less experienced gamers... :rolleyes:

Ozorik
08-05-2010, 22:05
Its as valid as claiming that only WotR players like variable charge ranges.

Balerion
08-05-2010, 22:25
Strategic goals alter every single game. They are not static :/
But, wait, so do tactical ones. So what are you even saying?

I think my responses to your original post have been in-line. It may be that your initial point was poorly presented.

kyuzo
09-05-2010, 02:39
They werent fought by shuffling forwards and backwards a couple of inches though were they.

I will use an example for you. Alexander the greats first battle(under the command of his father) was fought similar to this way. The infantry was so well trained they were able to move forwards and then start pulling backwards baiting the athenian infantry into charging for them. The calv proceeded to flank them, which was pretty much a complete devastation.


But, wait, so do tactical ones. So what are you even saying?

I think my responses to your original post have been in-line. It may be that your initial point was poorly presented.

My point was that random charges only effects your tactics and has nothing to do with your strategic objectives. Rules do not really have an impact on strategy per se, it more or less comes down to what your army is and what your opponents army is where you draw your objectives.

VonUber
09-05-2010, 03:21
But doesnt gw realise most vets wont touch anything to do with Lotr due to that god awful stratergy game what was "roll higher to win".
and war of the ring wasnt even enjoyable.

SamVimes
09-05-2010, 03:49
Erm...Huh?

Skyth
09-05-2010, 05:13
You do realize that GW doesn't care about Vets one bit...they already bought an army.

VonUber
09-05-2010, 06:18
You do realize that GW doesn't care about Vets one bit...they already bought an army.

I know this. I just like to keep verbalising it:D

Ozorik
09-05-2010, 08:53
But doesnt gw realise most vets wont touch anything to do with Lotr due to that god awful stratergy game what was "roll higher to win".
and war of the ring wasnt even enjoyable.

You do realise that warhammer historicals have actually used the LotR rules as a basis for popular historical games? Given that historicals tends to be the preserve of 'vets' I suggest that your statement need some revision.


I will use an example for you.

Which would still work under variable charge ranges. Specific historical examples are not much use either given that fantasy is not, nor is meant to be, a realistic wargame (and I don't mean in terms of setting).

tezdal
09-05-2010, 18:31
I wish warhammer would be more like the WOTR system, simple, elegant, and overall a better system then fantasy

SamVimes
09-05-2010, 20:53
You do realize that GW doesn't care about Vets one bit...they already bought an army.

Yes, and that is precisely why they make limited edition models. To lure in the n00bs.

Spiney Norman
09-05-2010, 21:55
I wish warhammer would be more like the WOTR system, simple, elegant, and overall a better system then fantasy

I'm afraid, with the publication of the recent WotR FAQ my like and appreciation for the game has dropped significantly. You can't even use common sense to solve the mechanics issues now because of the idiotic solutions presented in it.

The heroic duel system is now totally, irrevocably shafted, and since any hero without the Epic strike ability is now almost worthless, magic is even more of an irrelevance than it was before. Add to the fact that anything with the ridiculously hard to kill rule is still completely invincible.

But hey, at least it has a fluid movement mechanic...

Sloeberjong
10-05-2010, 07:22
Of course there is a subtle difference between "WOTR influence on Fantasy" and "Fantasy becoming WOTR" ;)

Spiney Norman
10-05-2010, 16:00
Seeing as it's the same idiotic cretin writing both books I'm not so convinced about that...

Shimmergloom
10-05-2010, 18:16
Yeah, I have a hard time understanding how after seeing Ward ruin greenskins and then create DoC which started the arms race that ruined 7th, that so many people are going on and on to BRING IT ON! for 8th.

Even the Raiders got rid of Jamarcus Russell.

Sloeberjong
11-05-2010, 06:57
Seeing as it's the same idiotic cretin writing both books I'm not so convinced about that...

Fair point...but I'm really more of a "glass half full" kinda guy, so I'll reserve some optimism :angel: