PDA

View Full Version : An interesting idea regarding initiative order in close combat



Torga_DW
22-09-2011, 04:05
I just had an idea while smoking (i do my best thinking while having a smoke). What if during combat, each side in a combat rolled 2D6, and then added their respective initiative values to that number to determine who strikes first.

For example, high elf spearmen and a noble in combat with ogres. The high elves roll 7 on 2d6, adding 4 for the spearmen and 5(? i can't remember and am at work atm) for the noble. The ogres get really lucky and roll 10, adding 2 from their initiative. So the noble and the ogres strike at the same time, with the spearmen fighting next.

Okay, so i forgot that high elves get always strike first and so would be fighting first regardless. But you get the idea. So on average, faster people will still strike first, but occaisionally the slow hitters get the advantage.

Just wondering what people think.

AlphariusOmegon20
22-09-2011, 04:37
I just had an idea while smoking (i do my best thinking while having a smoke). What if during combat, each side in a combat rolled 2D6, and then added their respective initiative values to that number to determine who strikes first.

For example, high elf spearmen and a noble in combat with ogres. The high elves roll 7 on 2d6, adding 4 for the spearmen and 5(? i can't remember and am at work atm) for the noble. The ogres get really lucky and roll 10, adding 2 from their initiative. So the noble and the ogres strike at the same time, with the spearmen fighting next.

Okay, so i forgot that high elves get always strike first and so would be fighting first regardless. But you get the idea. So on average, faster people will still strike first, but occaisionally the slow hitters get the advantage.

Just wondering what people think.

Actually for the idea to work, you'd have to remove ASF from the Elves. Otherwise, it's a useless system, as it doesn't fix the biggest issue in 8th, which is Elves with GW having ASF regardless, despite the rulebook saying this combo makes you go at your Initiative.

ZoomDog
22-09-2011, 05:24
as it doesn't fix the biggest issue in 8th, which is Elves with GW having ASF regardless, despite the rulebook saying this combo makes you go at your Initiative.

You think this is the biggest issue with the edition? :)

Above idea is too random IMO, adding 2d6 adds too much variation. I don't want Saurus Warriors striking first almost as often as Humans.

Liber
22-09-2011, 07:17
i like the idea, but it needs one major change imo: only roll one d6, not two.

i mean, i get the point of making it randomized, but 2d6 would just be crazy, there would not be a big enough difference between high I units and low I units to justify high I costing so much more. it would be too random. 1d6 would i think give other armies (dwarfs) a chance to get lucky sometimes, and not ALWAYS strike last no matter what.

ftayl5
22-09-2011, 07:42
I disagree, I think that would be horrible to be honest.
Wood Elves are faster than Night Runners, who are faster than people who are faster than Zombies. There shouldn't be any randomness to this, ever.
If this did happen, with the explanation being that the unit was invigorated and spurred into fighting with triple their normal speed, then the next logical step is to do the same with strength. The unit became enraged at their foe and became stronger than ogres!

Sorry, but this is a not a good idea in my opinion.

What I would prefer is that Initiative can be modified by actions, not dice.
For example charging grants +1 Initiative, charging on a horse grants +2, etc, something like that.
But to re-emphasize, random Initiative modifiers - no thank you.

Barry "the blade"
22-09-2011, 08:00
The way the stats are set up now I don't think this would work very well. It does seem like initiative is the only stat you don't roll off, unlike Str vs T, and ws vs ws however.

grimkeeper
22-09-2011, 08:25
I like the idea,:) although with only 1d6.I would also have ASF adds +1 to I while GWs reduce I by 1. It really is boring when Dwarves,Ogres,Lizards etc are always strikeing last.

Fajita!
22-09-2011, 08:33
Actually for the idea to work, you'd have to remove ASF from the Elves. Otherwise, it's a useless system, as it doesn't fix the biggest issue in 8th, which is Elves with GW having ASF regardless, despite the rulebook saying this combo makes you go at your Initiative.

When did this become the biggest issue in 8th? Gw elves are far from op

EnternalVoid
22-09-2011, 09:08
I have seen games like this and while it is an interesting idea, I do not think it is for Warhammer. Something like that has tended to work better with a single game turn system rather than a dual game turn system.

In all honestly I think it would be better to give a unit +2 Initiative or something for charging. I have noticed that High Initiative armies are not as worried about getting charged, often marching right in front of units and letting them charge. It also has a spew of other advantages.

-Cav gets a bonus as they often win the charges. Now they are less likely of being killed before they can swing by a hero or troops. So things like Knights might actually get their lance attacks before being hit by those S5 Chaos warriors.

-It would be a way to help fight Elves, even High Elves. The charge might push your Initiative high enough that they don't get re-rolls due to ASF or you might actually hit those Dark Elves before their Hatred Attacks tear up a whole rank or two.

-It might be more important which Hero charged what hero, or monsters charging other things.

someone2040
22-09-2011, 09:12
I don't like this idea.
Not only would it be frustrating for armies with multiple initiative steps (unless you roll once for the entire unit), it just doesn't make sense.
While with charges, you can imagine the whole unit stumbling forwards or getting a huge boost of momentum, why are 10 Elves suddenly going to trip and let Saurus go first. One guy tripping and getting stabbed I can imagine, but your entire fighting ranks?

Just doesn't make sense.

There's nothing wrong with fighting in initiative order anyway.

WarmbloodedLizard
22-09-2011, 09:15
more rolling, more time consuming. nope :D

Dæmon
22-09-2011, 09:16
Don't like the idea. The stats represent the characteristics of a unit. It gives them "soul".
If i want everything in warhammer to be random I will run nothing but NG fanatics and giants.

brynolf
22-09-2011, 09:54
Not a bad idea, but there is already way too many dice being rolled all over the place in 8th. Even more won't make it funnier, especially not if it's a relatively unimportant phenomenon like Initiative. We've got step up now, it doesn't matter who strikes first most of the time.

Scythe
22-09-2011, 10:01
I just had an idea while smoking (i do my best thinking while having a smoke). What if during combat, each side in a combat rolled 2D6, and then added their respective initiative values to that number to determine who strikes first.


So, any reason why this change? What problem are you trying to solve? Why would you want to slow down the game for this rule? How does it add something to the game?

tr1pod
22-09-2011, 10:19
I would much rather see Cavalry get impact hits. It only needs to be D3 per horse or something like that. This for me, would make more sense and make cavalry so much better.

Fajita!
22-09-2011, 10:23
I would much rather see Cavalry get impact hits. It only needs to be D3 per horse or something like that. This for me, would make more sense and make cavalry so much better.

D3 per horse would be pretty insane. I think just one would be almost pushing it.

NixonAsADaemonPrince
22-09-2011, 10:41
D3 per horse would be pretty insane. I think just one would be almost pushing it.

1 per horse but with barding adding +1 Strength. Would work nicely I think.

Rosstifer
22-09-2011, 10:45
1 per horse but with barding adding +1 Strength. Would work nicely I think.

Chaos Knights with Str5 Impact hits. Mmmm. That'd be Tasty.

Urgat
22-09-2011, 11:11
then the next logical step is to do the same with strength.

It's already the case. You roll to hit, you roll to wound, you may as well roll to be first. Though I would have suggested 1D3, not 2D6. No way a saurus should be given the opportunity to go faster than a HE lord, for instance.

Valnir
22-09-2011, 11:13
First off cavalry is fine, it could do with a bit of a price decrease, but the idea for cavalry in this edition is to not be the I Win button. Cavalry used in conjunction with rank and file troops to help get rid of steadfast can often send most units packing first turn.

Adding impact hits would just be plain goofy not to mention be putting them over the top again. Just use them in conjunction with your big blocks and you`ll see them shine


As for needing to nerf initiative based armies.... really?? Does the OP really feel that going first is that game breaking? :wtf:

Urgat
22-09-2011, 11:18
I don't think he proposes to nerf anything, or thinks anything is broken in regard to initiative. From his post, I'd say he's just throwing an idea around, thinking it might be fun. Why not? That being said, it belongs to the rules creation forum I suppose.

AmaroK
22-09-2011, 11:23
So, any reason why this change? What problem are you trying to solve? Why would you want to slow down the game for this rule? How does it add something to the game?

I agree with Scythe. Adding these rules would not solve anything and would give extra and unnecesary rules. Charging is not that useless as it could seems at first sight (+1 combat resolution? meh :P). Besides the obvious +1, you get the bonus of charging weapons and skills (lances, impact hits etc) and also you can dictate where and vs who you are going to fight, and consider further tactical moves if you can break or not, make a bottle neck or whatever. But also, you control the next magic phase, and it can give you the edge of the fight using buffs/hexes/other spells.

So I think the "need" of something more in the initiative because of charging is because we got used for that in 7th, not because the current 8th mechanics are needing it. Except for some low initiative cavalry (saurus cold one riders, I´m looking at you!), but that can be fixed through impact hits (only one) and/or lowering their points.

Torga_DW
22-09-2011, 20:09
I don't think he proposes to nerf anything, or thinks anything is broken in regard to initiative. From his post, I'd say he's just throwing an idea around, thinking it might be fun. Why not? That being said, it belongs to the rules creation forum I suppose.

Yeah, it was just an idea i had and wanted to see what ppl thought of it. I didn't really see it as rules creation, just a 'what if' for the game in general. Thank you those who have posted so far. :)

sulla
22-09-2011, 23:59
Yeah, it was just an idea i had and wanted to see what ppl thought of it. I didn't really see it as rules creation, just a 'what if' for the game in general. Thank you those who have posted so far. :)Though there are exceptions, the general balance theme is strength vs speed. Giving slower troops a bigger advantage would make strength even more important than it is now. I think possibly, the game could take weapon modifiers... +1I for spears, +2I for lances, -1I for halberds etc to add a little variety to I steps. Other than that, Dwarves and Saurus could probably stand having their I increased to improve them a little, both in combat and vs the I-based doom spells.

eron12
23-09-2011, 07:31
I just had an idea while smoking (i do my best thinking while having a smoke). What if during combat, each side in a combat rolled 2D6, and then added their respective initiative values to that number to determine who strikes first.

For example, high elf spearmen and a noble in combat with ogres. The high elves roll 7 on 2d6, adding 4 for the spearmen and 5(? i can't remember and am at work atm) for the noble. The ogres get really lucky and roll 10, adding 2 from their initiative. So the noble and the ogres strike at the same time, with the spearmen fighting next.

Okay, so i forgot that high elves get always strike first and so would be fighting first regardless. But you get the idea. So on average, faster people will still strike first, but occaisionally the slow hitters get the advantage.

Just wondering what people think.

This doesn't seem like a horrible root idea, though I think using 2d6 makes the I stat far less important as most of the time you will be rolling higher than the I. I am remanded of a DnD cartoon where a character said, "I roll 1d12 +243 for damage." To which the target replied, "I hope he rolls a 1."

Mostly though, I think this is a case of if it's not broke, don't fix it. I don't see a big issue with the current system, and most of the complaints (regarding charging and the like) wouldn't be effected by this. It seems to just add more randomness (which may or may not be a good thing) and more dice rolling, for little gain.


Actually for the idea to work, you'd have to remove ASF from the Elves. Otherwise, it's a useless system, as it doesn't fix the biggest issue in 8th, which is Elves with GW having ASF regardless, despite the rulebook saying this combo makes you go at your Initiative.

I'm curious as to your experiences, if Elves with GW having Speed of Asyran is the biggest issue in 8th ed for you. You won't get a concensus on this even being an issue, let alone the biggest issue.

theunwantedbeing
23-09-2011, 09:52
I'm curious as to your experiences, if Elves with GW having Speed of Asyran is the biggest issue in 8th ed for you. You won't get a concensus on this even being an issue, let alone the biggest issue.

This is because the internet is packed full of people who have very strong opinions on high elves sucking so much that they NEED this rule and anyone who disagrees or says anything untoward about it is an idiot.

High elves shouldn't have the speed of Asuryan special rule, but they do and GW isn't going to change this untill they re-do the high elf book. Which won't be for a long time. It was an uncreative fix that simply worked rather than being particularly great as a fix for the high elves.

As for the OP's original idea.
Initiative + 2D6 is a bit too variable and random, much like the way we generate magic dice for the magic phase.

While striking first is generally considered irrelevant in 8th edition this is only when you have a unit that isn't bothered about not striking first. ie a very big hoarde capable of not losing any attacks by striking last. Something that has flanked/rear charged an enemy and isn't facing a significant enough number of attacks to be worried about striking order.

Smaller units are of course affected by this.
Which is why great weapon hoardes are amazing, while small units of elite great weapon weilding models are very poor choices, except possibly high elves provided that they're facing things that can't soak up the damage they can put out.

I would personally prefer to see great weapons lose the ASL rule when the model weilding it is charging. Much like last edition as this helps bring back some reasonable benefit to getting the charge as well as making smaller units of great weapon weilding troops become useful again.

More stat bonues/penalties for varyious weapons would of course not go amiss. The cathayan longsword is a nice example of a weapon aiding stats that are not strength or attacks and warhammer needs more of these really.

Questionable-Methods
23-09-2011, 15:09
...Elves with GW having ASF regardless, despite the rulebook saying this combo makes you go at your Initiative.

Why is that? What lets them supercede the core rules? I honestly don't know as I haven't ever played against High Elves.


...What I would prefer is that Initiative can be modified by actions, not dice....

I think this is intriguing, but I think it would have to be carefully balanced. For example, if the rules grant you a +1/+2 bonus to I for charging, they shoudl do away with the +1 to combat resolution to balance things out).

Tayrod
23-09-2011, 16:11
Chaos Knights with Str5 Impact hits. Mmmm. That'd be Tasty.

I see your chaos knights with Str5, and raise you my orc boars, with str6 impact hits.

Torga_DW
24-09-2011, 19:29
This doesn't seem like a horrible root idea, though I think using 2d6 makes the I stat far less important as most of the time you will be rolling higher than the I. I am remanded of a DnD cartoon where a character said, "I roll 1d12 +243 for damage." To which the target replied, "I hope he rolls a 1."

The thing about 2d6, is it gives an average result of 7. So statistically, both sides will increase their I by 7 and there will be no difference in the order of attacks.

Jind_Singh
24-09-2011, 22:33
I'd rather see action based bonus for ini - maybe PLUS ONE for charging to show the initial rush of the charge, and for mounted troops with lances +1 ini AND if their horses get impact hit IF wearing barding - to represent the use of heavy cav to crush infantry as they charge

Chain
24-09-2011, 23:39
Rather than this I think we should have something like +1 I the round you charge the front, +2 I the round you charge a flank and +3 Initiative the round you make a rear charge

Chain
24-09-2011, 23:42
And possibly have ASF not counting against rear charges

eron12
25-09-2011, 06:07
Why is that? What lets them supercede the core rules? I honestly don't know as I haven't ever played against High Elves.

High Elves don't have Always Strike First, they have the Speed of Asyran rule. This rule gives the model Always Strike First regardless of the weapon it uses. So a High Elf with a Great weapon has retains Always Strike First.


The thing about 2d6, is it gives an average result of 7. So statistically, both sides will increase their I by 7 and there will be no difference in the order of attacks.

I agree that the average modification will be 7. Very few units have I 7, so the modification will have a larger impact than the base initiavie. Random additions should suplament the existing stat, not render it meaningless.

spurker
25-09-2011, 08:02
I see where the idea is coming from, but won't it slow things down?

frapermax
25-09-2011, 10:10
Spears could get +2 I against charges to their front. +1 extra against cav in the front.
Cav lances could work similarly: +3 I when using lances on the charge, +2 when using spears.
I think we might play it like that in our mini campaign, as a little try-out.
greets
fpm

Scythe
26-09-2011, 07:00
I agree that the average modification will be 7. Very few units have I 7, so the modification will have a larger impact than the base initiavie. Random additions should suplament the existing stat, not render it meaningless.

Agreed. The initiative stat isn't extremely important in the current game anyway, due to step up / remove casualties from the rear. Making it less important isn't the way to go imho.