Building a better Warhammer

[Archdaimon]

The upshot is that 20 points seemed about right and then the multiplier (.8 of existing cost) ensures that master wizards are more expensive than two basic wizards. This is as it should be, since a master is more effective at casting and stopping, and can use more spells, so there is more chance that he will earn his points on a given round.

As the points cost are described now, the maser wizard is cheaper than 2 wizards.

Example: My wizard in the empire list cost 60 points + 20 wiz abilities.
That is 80 points.
The exact same wizard with same stats just as a master costs 80x1,8= 144 points?

[Archdaimon]

I have thought about the following for characters, that we might try out.
A serious price nerf, instead of halving when calculating price, we will be quartering.
ML is half price up to the ML of the troops they belong to (or have options to join), and full price thereafter.
That means that a general of the empire, who can join all sorts of troops pay extra for everything above ML C, while the Grandmaster who can only join knights pay full price only from B.

Everyarmy must choose a general, being general costs extra points because of his +1 bonus.

This is still a thought experiment, what are your immediate concerns?
My character limitation system will make sure that characters still won't be spammed, they still won't be killing rank and file troops with 2 attacks, but now they actually make a bit sense to bring.

[Infinitium]

Both armies getting a general with the same bonuses balances out the cost anyway, so why bother having to pay points for it?

[Archdaimon]

Both armies getting a general with the same bonuses balances out the cost anyway, so why bother having to pay points for it?

Ofcourse... I missed that one... Doh!

[Commissar von Toussaint]

As the points cost are described now, the maser wizard is cheaper than 2 wizards.

Example: My wizard in the empire list cost 60 points + 20 wiz abilities.
That is 80 points.
The exact same wizard with same stats just as a master costs 80x1,8= 144 points?

You're right, I got it exactly backwards.

I originally made them really, really expensive, and a friend said "Well, why settle for the +1 when you can double your probability by taking two normal ones?"

So yeah. I've played the game, though. I swear.

I used a hellblaster in a game and it is a little powerful. I'd just delete the first sentence: it can only fire once per game turn like other artillery. So if it lets off a blast, it has to reload (swap out barrels). I like it being super-deadly, though.

Let's not overthink the warrior priest. The question is what he really does.

His combat abilities are easy, the real question is how he helps. In WHFB, he causes hatred, which is inappropriate (mostly because Conqueror is so much deadlier).

The other thing he has is spells. But you don't want them to be like everyone else's spells.

My solution: increase his cost by 20 points and he gives a +1 Morale die roll against units in melee combat with Undead, Chaos, and Skaven units.

[Archdaimon]

That sounds about right.

1) Concerning saurus. I I'll end up with the following: ms 4, ml C. Ignores Shaken and disordered. that ability should be something like +30 or +40.
The temple guard however should be like flagellants. that is around +60 for that ability right? And then you can only bring 1 templeguard unit per slann. (Slanns a tier 1 choice). Templeguards being ms5, ml b. And maybe some rule that if the slann should die somehow, they loose all those morale advantages. (though that doesn't count for the saurus.)

1a) All skinks are all skirmishers, doesn't have any morale advantages other that being ml C.
I somehow don't want the skink+kroxigor ruel, other than maybe... just maybe, kroxigors should ignore fleeing skinks sort of like detachments... But it might be unecessary blah!

1b) Haven't read up on chariots so still unsure on stegadons...

1c) And we still need some points for flying...

1d) and points for monsters.

2) Hellblaster: 140 and every other turn sounds about right.

3) With the tier system, it is good that the lord wizard is cheaper. There will never be a spamming of masters over regulars that way.

4) My final beta empire list until we figure something out for flying!

5) Concerning chariots. I believe your points calculation for chariots will make them seriously underpowered compared to their price. They only thing they get is 3 extra movepoints for the same calculationprice as 10 men. I know they get d3 impact hits, but is that really worth 10 men or 5 knights? I don't think so.
A typical chariot will get something like 3 wounds, 3 attacks and impact hits going for them right?
I belive the final price for a chariot should at least be halved, then it compares to about 2,5 knights and 5 men, which seems about right?
The real problem here is the same for monsters. When calculating the price of a unit it is for 10 men at a time, which means 9 free wounds and 9 free attacks, or knights which means 4 free attacks and 4 free wounds (but they get good weapon and armor options so no real problem there).

[Archdaimon]

Concerning 1d) price of monsters and price of chariots.

Build the unit as usual with ms, sv morale weapons etc. but don't give them any wounds and attacks.
When you have finished the cost that is the price of 3 models, with 3 wounds and 3 attacks.
All monsters get +1 easier to hit in shooting, but get +1 AP in addition to the already stated rules of ignoring outranking (I think?)...
This will make them the bane of knights, but easy targets to shooting.

It might seems clunky to calculate but players won't notice, and won't need to know. This is for getting more fairly priced monster units such as ogres, kroxigors and what not.

[Commissar von Toussaint]

The list looks good, I like the bits of fluff.

Chariots: It isn't in the points calculations, but the assumption was that they came with three wounds and two attacks in addition to their impact hits.

Similarly, monsters are assumed to get a base of two attacks and two wounds. They haven't seemed too out of whack, maybe giving them another wound would do the trick. I'm shy about giving them more attacks, though, because that would give them more attacks than a similar frontage of non-monsters.

Though they will be outranked, so maybe it would balance.

See, this is where things get sticky: the nuts and bolts of special units.

Lizardmen: Saurus are MS 3, Temple Guard MS 4 - that's how they would translate.

Cold-blooded only ignores disorder - they can still be shaken. Morale: Saurus are C, Temple Guard B and Skinks are D.

Treat the Slann as one big model with modest MS and a lot of wounds, and Morale A.

Winged units: +30 points, but they are monsters, so base unit size is only 3 (but we are giving them three wounds).

Flyers: +30 points, monsters, but only get two wounds (flying critters are more fragile).

[Archdaimon]

I like very much what you have written. I believe that we should do as you say and keep monsters to two attacks, however they continue to ignore being outranked.

Giving saus ms3... hm, this would put them on par with regular humans in killing power, which i belief is a huge nerf on their part. Simply put, in whfb, they have more attacks and mediocre ws, but high st and toughness. I believe the basic saurus should be ms4.. templeguard possibly only ms4, but with better armor (saurus going on light armor and shield, and templeguards with heavy armor and shields). I do however agree with you on morale. Except that I am a bit unsure whether or not I want them to ignore being shaken or being disordered. Cold-blooded could hint at them ignoring that there mates are dying, however they get as disordered as any one else in battle...

I will try and work out a list that shows my ideas.

[Commissar von Toussaint]

I like very much what you have written. I believe that we should do as you say and keep monsters to two attacks, however they continue to ignore being outranked.

Oh, they shouldn't ignore being outranked. No, that's how you beat them! Number count and all that. I'd rather boost their attacks to 3 then say "outranking doesn't effect monsters." It's one less special rule. Besides, the "ignore outranking" is a special power. We can't just give it to everyone, can we?

Giving saus ms3... hm, this would put them on par with regular humans in killing power, which i belief is a huge nerf on their part. Simply put, in whfb, they have more attacks and mediocre ws, but high st and toughness. I believe the basic saurus should be ms4.. templeguard possibly only ms4, but with better armor (saurus going on light armor and shield, and templeguards with heavy armor and shields). I do however agree with you on morale. Except that I am a bit unsure whether or not I want them to ignore being shaken or being disordered. Cold-blooded could hint at them ignoring that there mates are dying, however they get as disordered as any one else in battle...

Hmmm, I see your point about MS. In WFHB WS was inferior to S, so though only WS 3, Saurus were better off than (say) a WS 4 S3 unit. And I forgot they could bite. (I last played against a lizardmen army when 5th edition was current.)

One other thing to keep in mind: Saurus use large bases. This means their have less attacks per frontage. With orcs I offset this with their ferocious charge and ignoring panic.

What about giving hem a bonus AP 1? This would apply all the time (not just on the charge) and would basically be free. Then they could be MS 4, which would make them formidable indeed.

Temple guard would get better equipment and also higher morale.

Cold blooded. Hmmm. The essence of this is that they just don't get that emotional. They're stoic. I really like that they just don't get disordered. Understand that this is a far bigger bonus than shaken - you only can get shaken if you lose a lot of troops, but anyone can fumble a morale roll.

It's big, 20 points at least. But I think that's a good way of showing what they are.

I will try and work out a list that shows my ideas.

Looking forward to it!

[Archdaimon]

1) I have right now charged the Lizardmen a 20 points for being unable to get disordered (and cold blood in general!).

2) Monster rule now: 3 w, 3 at. +1 to hit with shooting, +1 to their ap.

3) Giving saurus +1 ap makes sense, in that they don't have that much cavalry. We just have to, on the other hand, accept that coldblooded MS4 MLc +1ap with spears are going to kick ****! In truth I don't se the larger base being a problem? with 5 25mm wide against 5 20mm wide there are still equal amount of models in the fight. Same against knights. Larger base is worse... but just how much worse is it in reality, I am not really sure, and right now I cannot see the situations in which it becomes a problem.

4) Characters... been going back and forth on that one. I ended up with the following, because they are all about morale. And the morale that matters is the morale where they add to the unit they are with. Anyhow, if you only charged them for morale, then however good they are at keeping themselves alive is ignored. I ended up with the following wonky formula, which seems to (theoretically) work well.

((10+ms+w+AS+"army special ability cost")/4 + 2,5p per ml "not affecting unt morale"+ 12,5 p "per ml affecting unit morale" ) x 1,5 + (AP+M)/4 = (Price of character + 20p if a wizard) x 1,8 if a master wizard = Price of master wizard!

or in other words, everything costs 1/4, except ml that doesn't matter cost ½ and ml that matters cost full... and then you add an extra 50% characters are annoying penalty

if you want an armory, and not options for characters, armor costs 1/4 of their normal price x 1,5 or original price x 0.375.
Weapons doesn't add to keeping a hero alive. Therefore they are not charged with the 50% annoying bonus. Neither is movement for some reason, though maybe it should? I must say that the regular 2,5p per movement point is enough... also with warhorses etc.

I know it... its wonky, but it works... this way morale has a huge effect on character price, yet how well he stays alive matters too.

[Archdaimon]

With the rewonked (does that word exist?) prices for characters, and a few other bugs removed, here is the new empire beta list.

And the first hit at a Lizardmen armylist.

[Commissar von Toussaint]

1) I have right now charged the Lizardmen a 20 points for being unable to get disordered (and cold blood in general!).

Cool.

2) Monster rule now: 3 w, 3 at. +1 to hit with shooting, +1 to their ap.

No, just the wounds and attacks. No +1 to be hit - a unit of ogres isn't appreciably bigger than an infantry regiment. At this scale, shooters are aiming at formations rather than individuals (which is why skirmishers are -1 to be hit).

The +1 AP is paid for on a per-monster basis. I see it happening a lot, but if it does, they have to pay extra.

3) Giving saurus +1 ap makes sense, in that they don't have that much cavalry. We just have to, on the other hand, accept that coldblooded ms4 mlc +1ap with spears are going to kick ****! In truth I don't se the larger base being a problem? with 5 25mm wide against 5 20mm wide there are still equal amount of models in the fight. Same against knights. Larger base is worse... but just how much worse is it in reality, I am not really sure, and right now I cannot see the situations in which it becomes a problem.

In playtesting it came up quite frequently. Orcs usually came off worse against just about everybody because the extra one or two attacks tipped the scale.

In a game where ranks aren't as important as killing, units expand their frontages. I ran some interesting games with high elves fighting ten across and only three deep with spears. Much killing.

4) Characters... been going back and forth on that one. I ended up with the following, because they are all about morale. And the morale that matters is the morale where they add to the unit they are with. Anyhow, if you only charged them for morale, then however good they are at keeping themselves alive is ignored. I ended up with the following wonky formula, which seems to (theoretically) work well.

((10+ms+w+AS+"army special ability cost")/4 + 2,5p per ml "not affecting unt morale"+ 12,5 p "per ml affecting unit morale" ) x 1,5 + (AP+M)/4 = (Price of character + 20p if a wizard) x 1,8 if a master wizard = Price of master wizard!

or in other words, everything costs 1/4, except ml that doesn't matter cost ½ and ml that matters cost full... and then you add an extra 50% characters are annoying penalty

if you want an armory, and not options for characters, armor costs 1/4 of their normal price x 1,5 or original price x 0.375.
Weapons doesn't add to keeping a hero alive. Therefore they are not charged with the 50% annoying bonus. Neither is movement for some reason, though maybe it should? I must say that the regular 2,5p per movement point is enough... also with warhorses etc.

Okay, I admire your enthusiasm, but this isn't actual bridge-building or rocket science. The system I use basically reduced characters to 1/4 of an infantry unit's price except for morale, which costs half. The end result seems to be appropriate. I'd rather characters were a little overpriced, honestly.

Remember, the points are only a rough metric so that people can develop games where the sides are roughly equal. I think these points are much closer to the combat value of the units than anything GW has come up with, but given that dice are involved, we can only get so close.

I know it... its wonky, but it works... this way morale has a huge effect on character price, yet how well he stays alive matters too.

Maybe you can show me the difference between the current system and what you're proposing - say with some Empire characters? I'm getting the sense that not much is really going to change.

[Archdaimon]

We are talking few points here (concerning characters). But none the less points.

The effect is obvious especially in higher end characters, where some of them can join troops with low morale, and others can't. If you see my list, if you strip away the eq. of a grandmaster knight, he costs the exact same as an empire general (almost).

The thing is the general can make spearmen go from c to a, where as the grandmaster can only get knights from B to A, which the empire general also can do if he wants. The knights however cannot join the spearmen.

Even more obvious it becomes in characters that can't improve morale to troops. They are now very cheap, and primarily there to accept challenges etc. (sergeants!)

I agree with you on monsters, but don't have time to change it now in the lizardmen list.
Everything that says monster rule will get deleted. That is, no extra to hit, no extra AP and easier kroxigor character rules.

[Archdaimon]

Oh and I didn't put anything extra for the big saurus bases... I like the AP idea, or maybe an extra bite attack in first round of combat?

[Archdaimon]

In a game where ranks aren't as important as killing, units expand their frontages. I ran some interesting games with high elves fighting ten across and only three deep with spears. Much killing.

Yeah, that does indeed sound badass!

[Commissar von Toussaint]

Okay, the new rules are up with some revised language, improved layout (it's more consistent and things don't bleed over) and - in recognition of our current discussion - some tweaks to the point system.

After looking some of the lists over, I've decided that the only bonus monsters get is they have a "baseline" of 2 wounds. Everything else has to be paid for.

I base this on prior games, which is the ultimate test of how things work. Ogres weren't obviously broken, though they did need a little boost. Right now, for example, in a fight between 20 orcs (160 points) and 3 ogres with two handweapons (180 pts) the ogres have a slight upper hand. But I think they are a little too expensive, so dropping them 10 points makes sense.

That being said, I don't much care how the points are tabulated so long as they work out right. This is the second method I've used to come up with them and many of the numbers I generated are similar, but some were very different. That's why I changed it.

Of course, now that I've finished, I see a typo where I've got that monsters pay full price for additional models. Crud. They shouldn't. Oh well.

Meanwhile, I've got a little more fluff on magic, added points for flyers and winged critters, and have the rules for how to put a character on a monster (like a griffon). Smiles for everyone!

[Archdaimon]

1) Monsters, If not full price, half price?

2)Looking over your morale requirements for passing a rally. What is your reflections on making it that hard? Anyting but an A or B (if lucky) has a chance of rallying.
This combined with forced test for every shooting at a unit makes it maybe a tad to tuff for C, D and E morale?
What have your playtesting shown?

3) In the 0,8 wording in calculating character cost, is is somewhat unclear if you want characters to recieve a free attack.

4) Newest edition of my Lizardmen list and a very close to finished empire list, now with griffons and pegaus (Pegasi?). It follows all your guidelines for point calculations, except for characters where I use my own. I still think that monsters seem overpriced, but if you say playtesting shows otherwise I'll take your word for it . With my characterpoint calculations prices get a bit weird (69 points, 61,5 etc.). This will not be in the final edition, but as long as it is a work in progress I'll stay with their true value...

[Commissar von Toussaint]

In order:

1. Basically next week I'll have the revisions in place that will make monster costs a little clearer.

2. Not really. The Command Table is pretty friendly to low-morale troops - better than it is in WHFB, actually.

3. Same as 1. above, for characters

4. I'll get back to you when I've had some time to go over it in a little detail.

Regarding the mystery of the Bretonnian Armory costs, I think these are the correct, revised costs.

Also, today I sketched out a series of special rules that I will include as concepts. The points appendix will have the costs for each. Look for it next week.

[Archdaimon]

regarding 2) DOH! my mistake entirely... forgort that two dices are rolled. sry.

Done with most of the Lizardmen list. I would very much like some feedback on Stegadons and Terradons. Are they to pricy, not expensive enough? Really really like some comments on those....