Building a better Warhammer

[Archdaimon]

A question came up: Does javelin throwing count towards combatresolution when thrown on charge?

Does characters or other units (monsters) with ranged weapons that have 2 attacks get to shoot twice, javelins for example?

[Archdaimon]

So here is a longer feedback on our first tests.

1) The Empire list seemed good. Good balance overall, nothing major. Perhaps a slight points increase in volleygun.

2) However some pretty major changes to the Lizardmen is necessary.
a) Can coldblooded (Ignore disorder) in any way be better than morale one lvl higher?
I cannot see that happening so charging points for it should be cheaper, or at lest equal to the same thing as a morale increase. Or in the easiest circumstances, remove it and just give them morale one higher. Or again, were back to letting them ignore shaken instead of disorder.
b) Skinks had become glass cannons. They killed a lot, but they died a lot. A general nerf to skinks and their weapons, and a nerf to their cost.
c) Skink nerf affects stegadon and makes it better.
d) Skink nerf affects terradon, and removing the stonethrowinga abbilities makes it better. Fewer special rules are truly better.
e) Removing cold-one knights from core.

3) This is probably the biggest thing. Generally people were hapy with the rules except one major thing. Characters died, and they died fast. We discussed it a bit, and several suggestions came to the table. We didn't want them more killy, just give us the chance to use their morale more or actually once. More wounds was suggested, I disliked it for fluff reasons. We ended up deciding to try out the follwoing next game.
All characters recieve a look out sir roll when in melee. If a hit is made against a character, there is a 50/50 chance that the hit is instead made against a regular model. Characters do no get this roll if hit by other characters or is in a challenge.

This has following effects:
1) characters on mounts get a nerf. Knights don't have many troops and they are more expensive. Monstermounts are cheap, but characters leadership is wasted and he gets no look out sir.
2) This could potentially be misused if a very killy character could join very cheap troops.
however a) Conqueror don't have very killy characters. b) with my tier system and character restriciton there is sharop control which unit a character can join.

else very fun game

[Commissar von Toussaint]

Where did those army lists go? I was going to go over the lizardmen but they're gone!

So here is a longer feedback on our first tests.

1) The Empire list seemed good. Good balance overall, nothing major. Perhaps a slight points increase in volleygun.

Sounds plausible.

2) However some pretty major changes to the Lizardmen is necessary.
a) Can coldblooded (Ignore disorder) in any way be better than morale one lvl higher?
I cannot see that happening so charging points for it should be cheaper, or at lest equal to the same thing as a morale increase. Or in the easiest circumstances, remove it and just give them morale one higher. Or again, were back to letting them ignore shaken instead of disorder.

If you look at the Morale Table, ignoring disorder effectively boosts them by two steps. C Morale troops get "no result" on a 4+, which is normally something only A Morale troops get.

Now the -1 for being in disorder doesn't seem like much, but it pulls the unit toward being routed. Shaken also takes its toll, though as I've pointed out before, you have to lose troops for the shaken thing to be worth something. Ignoring disorder helps from the very start.

b) Skinks had become glass cannons. They killed a lot, but they died a lot. A general nerf to skinks and their weapons, and a nerf to their cost.

Without seeing the list it's hard to say. I love the expression "glass cannons" though. I've not encountered that before.

c) Skink nerf affects stegadon and makes it better.
d) Skink nerf affects terradon, and removing the stonethrowinga abbilities makes it better. Fewer special rules are truly better.
e) Removing cold-one knights from core.

Not sure what "nerf" means in this context. Sorry, I'm getting more used to European English, but I'm still missing things.

3) This is probably the biggest thing. Generally people were hapy with the rules except one major thing. Characters died, and they died fast. We discussed it a bit, and several suggestions came to the table. We didn't want them more killy, just give us the chance to use their morale more or actually once. More wounds was suggested, I disliked it for fluff reasons. We ended up deciding to try out the follwoing next game.
All characters recieve a look out sir roll when in melee. If a hit is made against a character, there is a 50/50 chance that the hit is instead made against a regular model. Characters do no get this roll if hit by other characters or is in a challenge.

This surprises me. In my games the characters were quite durable - so much so that I had to create the "swarm" rule because characters were otherwise tying down whole units.

Remember that characters can only be attacked by the models in base-to-base contact with them. Looking the rules over, this must to be cleared up and 8.4 Characters in Melee Combat needs to be rewritten. It dates from when there was no AT stat in the profile.

In all of my games, it's been very hard for rank-and-file troopers to kill characters in melee. The characters are harder to hit and so unless you've got another character involved, they tend to skate right through. I'd be interested in hearing more about this.

This has following effects:
1) characters on mounts get a nerf. Knights don't have many troops and they are more expensive. Monstermounts are cheap, but characters leadership is wasted and he gets no look out sir.

There is no "look out sir" roll because it is automatic. Right under 8.0 (paragraph 5) it states that characters within units may NOT be targeted for shooting or magic attacks.

2) This could potentially be misused if a very killy character could join very cheap troops.
however a) Conqueror don't have very killy characters. b) with my tier system and character restriciton there is sharop control which unit a character can join.

Actually Conqueror characters are very "killy" but everything else is as well.

Consider: A character in WHFB that has a miiiighty 6 attacks. Assuming he's the baddest character in the game (WS 10, S10) fighting the worst trooper (WS 1, T1), he will miss 1/3 of the time and fail to wound 1/6 of the time. This gives him just over 50% chance of causing a wound. So he can kill three of the *worst* troops, maybe four, but highly unlikely that he will do better than that. Super unlikely that he gets all 6.

Now look at a Conqueror character with only 3 attacks MS 6 vs MS 1. He will almost assuredly get two, and a third is still quite likely. So basically Conqueror characters are almost twice as effective. That's why I keep a tight lid on the AT stat.

Oh, and before I forget from your previous post:

Javelins and thrown weapons do not count as part of the melee combat, though if they did that might simplify things. The initial concept was that you would be unlikely to rout them, but probably would thin them out a little and maybe put them in disorder.

And yes, characters and monsters - basically anything with multiple AT get to use them in shooting and in melee. This is stated in 1.4 when it discusses the profile, but I will restate it in the shooting rules.

The only limit on this is missile weapon type. If you have a harquebus or crossbow, you still have to spend a shooting phase reloading, so those extra shots are lost.

Of course, a magic/engineering item would be quite useful...

else very fun game

Cool!

I've noticed a trend whenever I tinker with a rule - I usually screw it up in the first iteration, and it takes two or three tries to get the wording just right - and also make sure that all the other references are fixed. This is why I'm so set on using the current stat line. Find/Replace will remove the letter combinations, but then I have to go through and manually rewrite all references - some of which may be spelled out.

I was on a big 40k kick, but now I think I'll give Conqueror a spin again and try some other playtesting combinations.

[Archdaimon]

I still do not follow you in your disorder argument... I will try harder to understand.
Until I do I have priced it at 5 point per 10 men instead of the former 20. This also has to be understood in the context of saurus with 25mm bases, and that skinks will rarely use it.
Primary things against equal to twice morale is: it does nothing in the first crucial morale test. It has a worse chance of rallying. In subsequent rounds of combat, statisticly, the -1 will make it closer to B morale, yet not completely. But generally Oh dear, this is why special rules are so tuff

Sorry but what do you mean with AT? Mayhaps we misunderstood the rules, but as you point out any model in contact with a character can hit him. If he has 2 wounds, and heavy armor and shield, lets say he goes against a unit of men with maces (-1 ap, some units have more, others have less, so ap1 is nice with examples). 3 men can hit him, at foot he has a maximum of 4+ save so that is 5+. 3 attacks will most often hit on 4+, unless he has ms6, which very few characters have. That is one wound, very posibly two, and this is against average to sucky troops. Against spears, knight and greatweapons your character is pretty much secured an early death. It is interesting to compare with those units, as they are by far the most common. Against those any w2 champ is very likely to die in round 1.
What I called look out sir is acually different. If a regular trooper is striking in melee at a character, there is a 50% chance that he hits a regular trooper instead, this is rolled before to hit and before armour saves. This makes sure that they live to fight another day. Characters ofcourse ignore this rule, which means that challenges etc. makes so much more sense. In a sense it is a 4+ wardsave against regular troops.

I have finished 3 lists. Empire, Bretonia and Lizardmen. They use your rules except for the following: My character calculations, monster units start with 3 free wounds instead of two, however monstermounts only start with 2. Monster mounts look cheap, but they are easy to kill, and those who can use them waste they pricy leadership on a mount.
And it is weird how there is alsways sneaking in stupid typos... these have been looked through very carefully and I hope they are done... But please please comment.

[Commissar von Toussaint]

I still do not follow you in your disorder argument... I will try harder to understand.
Until I do I have priced it at 5 point per 10 men instead of the former 20. This also has to be understood in the context of saurus with 25mm bases, and that skinks will rarely use it.
Primary things against equal to twice morale is: it does nothing in the first crucial morale test. It has a worse chance of rallying. In subsequent rounds of combat, statisticly, the -1 will make it closer to B morale, yet not completely. But generally Oh dear, this is why special rules are so tuff

So a base cost of 5 points which adds 10 points to infantry? Okay.

Sorry but what do you mean with AT? Mayhaps we misunderstood the rules, but as you point out any model in contact with a character can hit him. If he has 2 wounds, and heavy armor and shield, lets say he goes against a unit of men with maces (-1 ap, some units have more, others have less, so ap1 is nice with examples). 3 men can hit him, at foot he has a maximum of 4+ save so that is 5+. 3 attacks will most often hit on 4+, unless he has ms6, which very few characters have. That is one wound, very posibly two, and this is against average to sucky troops. Against spears, knight and greatweapons your character is pretty much secured an early death. It is interesting to compare with those units, as they are by far the most common. Against those any w2 champ is very likely to die in round 1.

A couple of thoughts:

1. Conqueror is designed to get away from the "every unit needs a champion" mindset. The game is titled against power gaming and particularly characters, and that was by design.

2. Generally the first round of combat is the key round. This is particularly the case with knights or set spears. That being the case, if your rank and file troopers waste attacks against harder-to-hit characters, they will lose the combat and likely run away before the character can be finished. Of course results may vary: weaker characters against elite units will be more vulnerable.

What I called look out sir is acually different. If a regular trooper is striking in melee at a character, there is a 50% chance that he hits a regular trooper instead, this is rolled before to hit and before armour saves. This makes sure that they live to fight another day. Characters ofcourse ignore this rule, which means that challenges etc. makes so much more sense. In a sense it is a 4+ wardsave against regular troops.

Nah, I'm not interested in going that way. If characters are getting whacked, magic them up!

As noted, the armor costs are too high. This also means that the magic item costs need to be brought down.

That is probably one difference in how my games have gone: I don't use many characters, but they always have their full array of magic, which makes them quite survivable.

I have finished 3 lists. Empire, Bretonia and Lizardmen. They use your rules except for the following: My character calculations, monster units start with 3 free wounds instead of two, however monstermounts only start with 2. Monster mounts look cheap, but they are easy to kill, and those who can use them waste they pricy leadership on a mount.
And it is weird how there is alsways sneaking in stupid typos... these have been looked through very carefully and I hope they are done... But please please comment.

First comment: Why is it Americans use a period (.) as a decimal and Europeans use a comma (,)? I spent over a month in Germany last summer and loved it (especially the autobahn ) but that's one thing I have noticed. Well, actually I noticed a lot of things, but I digress.

Okay, more on topic: The lists look good, though I would also be interested in seeing what was fielded. That is, are you using mostly elites? Maxing them out? Is shooting the focus or melee combat? I know Empire can do gun lines, so that may have some bearing.

Hopefully I'll have the new version up tomorrow night, so you can look it over. I'll also start updating my completed lists (basically pasting in the Bretonnian armory) and repost them.

[Archdaimon]

Our lists are mostly what I in my list call core... My empire list is a few shooty units core, one or two units of knights a few guns but mostly statetroopers with melee weapons. My friends Lizardmen are mostly saurus and skinks.

Concerning characters I believe we have two different aims there. My idea of the character is not the herohammer, or orc who tears through regulars. He is however special, and as this is fantasy, a bit more special than might be real. We like to give our characters names and follow them through campaigns and such, and while we may not max characters it is close, so most units will have a character, there are just too many beautiful and cool models not to make them special! I guess this is just different how you prefer things. So what I like about the conqueror rules is that they are not that much more killy than the ordinary grunt, he is however much more survivable lets just say heroes have the favours of gods. What we on the other hand tend to limit very strongly is magic items. We are discussing limiting tier 3 characters in general to no magic items, tier 2: 1 and tier 1: 2. that is however uncertrain.

Actually our greatest worry is actually to make elites too weak, because most core choices are so strong... sounds funny, but that has been our impression so far. Core with good weapons and knights... that is wonderful. But every unit have to pass the test: If I only field this unit type will I pawn everyone?... that answer HAS to be no!

On the other hand I do believe we are very aware of what units are strong, and therefore we have a tendency to limit those choices, basicly because if it was not limited why not just use those units as much as possible... the good answer being: "because that is powergaming", yet to my understanding of good rules from boardgames (my initial background for playing warhammer) and rpgs etc. is rules that let you use the rules to their max. That is the rules are meant to be played, and can play without all sorts of morality backhand deals, if the ruleset and armylist can stand the test of ultimate powergaming, then that is a good set of rules. Our group is very friendly and we play all sorts of games, all lists I make are peer reviewed, tested and corrected which I hope in the end will find a nice balance. Simply put, I want every choice of the army good, in the right combination for the right situations.

If the characters turn out too tuff with the "favour of god" rule, we will adjust it.

what is your impression of the stegadon... you think the price is right? We never got to test it (neither my old or new rules).

I believe it would make sense if using javelins (and thrown weapons in general) before charging would add to combat res. instead of morale test.

And finally, after finishing the bretonian list I just had one thought for my Empire dudes: WE NEED SOME PIKEMEN MODELS which I by the way forgot to put in my list... I believe the Empire should have pikemen, but I will probably add them as an elite choice...

p.s as you probably have noticed I am not a native english speaker, and a lot of the typoes show that. In Danish (my language) Bolt thrower would be written Boltthrower and Stone thrower as stonethrower.
I know that in English it is wrong to write the first letter of such words capital, yet it looks good. In Danish it is completely forbidden to write anything but names with capital and the first letter after a ".". So I am still in doubt whether to write Stone Thrower, Stone thrower or stone thrower

[Commissar von Toussaint]

Our lists are mostly what I in my list call core... My empire list is a few shooty units core, one or two units of knights a few guns but mostly statetroopers with melee weapons. My friends Lizardmen are mostly saurus and skinks.

Concerning characters I believe we have two different aims there. My idea of the character is not the herohammer, or orc who tears through regulars. He is however special, and as this is fantasy, a bit more special than might be real. We like to give our characters names and follow them through campaigns and such, and while we may not max characters it is close, so most units will have a character, there are just too many beautiful and cool models not to make them special! I guess this is just different how you prefer things. So what I like about the conqueror rules is that they are not that much more killy than the ordinary grunt, he is however much more survivable lets just say heroes have the favours of gods. What we on the other hand tend to limit very strongly is magic items. We are discussing limiting tier 3 characters in general to no magic items, tier 2: 1 and tier 1: 2. that is however uncertrain.

That's cool. I do the same thing. In fact, I got started on miniatures because I wanted my D&D characters to lead armies rather than just loot old castles.

Actually our greatest worry is actually to make elites too weak, because most core choices are so strong... sounds funny, but that has been our impression so far. Core with good weapons and knights... that is wonderful. But every unit have to pass the test: If I only field this unit type will I pawn everyone?... that answer HAS to be no!

The points work out pretty well, but weapon choice is just as important as troop quality.

An elite (MS 4, ML B) unit with sword and shield will be at a disadvantage against MS 3, ML C troops with spears.

But that's the way it should be. Now if those spears are militia (MS 2, ML D) than they will get crushed. But well-equipped regulars will give poorly-equipped elites a problem. Just like in real life.

So your true elites will have excellent equipment to match their skill. Thus Empire Knights are a solid, scary unit. But Grail Knights are even better - and they honestly don't need the virtues - just MS 5 ML A is pretty awesome.

On the other hand I do believe we are very aware of what units are strong, and therefore we have a tendency to limit those choices, basicly because if it was not limited why not just use those units as much as possible... the good answer being: "because that is powergaming", yet to my understanding of good rules from boardgames (my initial background for playing warhammer) and rpgs etc. is rules that let you use the rules to their max. That is the rules are meant to be played, and can play without all sorts of morality backhand deals, if the ruleset and armylist can stand the test of ultimate powergaming, then that is a good set of rules. Our group is very friendly and we play all sorts of games, all lists I make are peer reviewed, tested and corrected which I hope in the end will find a nice balance. Simply put, I want every choice of the army good, in the right combination for the right situations.

Sounds good. I plan to be in Germany next summer. I hear Denmark is rather close. We should set up a game!

If the characters turn out too tuff with the "favour of god" rule, we will adjust it.

Let me know how it turns out. I am a little worried about how this could really favor heroes and lords though. A guy with MS 6 might well be unkillable.

what is your impression of the stegadon... you think the price is right? We never got to test it (neither my old or new rules).

Looks okay. You'll have to put one on the table to really know. That's why I'm reasonably satisfied with my ogres - they weren't obviously broken, but I think they could be made a little better.

Speaking of which, why not give your Kroxigors AP 1 as a bonus? Makes 'em feel bigger. I'm not ready to make that come standard with all monsters, but I'm close.

I believe it would make sense if using javelins (and thrown weapons in general) before charging would add to combat res. instead of morale test.

I can see that. Next game run it that way and see how it goes.

And finally, after finishing the bretonian list I just had one thought for my Empire dudes: WE NEED SOME PIKEMEN MODELS which I by the way forgot to put in my list... I believe the Empire should have pikemen, but I will probably add them as an elite choice...

AMEN. I've always thought the Empire should have pikemen. I use mostly non-GW models so my "spears" are actually Flemish Pikemen.

p.s as you probably have noticed I am not a native english speaker, and a lot of the typoes show that. In Danish (my language) Bolt thrower would be written Boltthrower and Stone thrower as stonethrower.

Don't feel self-conscious - your English is waaay better than my Danish.

I know that in English it is wrong to write the first letter of such words capital, yet it looks good. In Danish it is completely forbidden to write anything but names with capital and the first letter after a ".". So I am still in doubt whether to write Stone Thrower, Stone thrower or stone thrower

Bah, I'm an American. We don't bother with rules much - least of all where writing is concerned.

[Archdaimon]

Just noticed that you didn't write the actual AP for a harqebus... but I suppose it is AP2?

Finished rules for the Salamander, though I still need some good ideas for making slanns awesome mages...

[Commissar von Toussaint]

Just noticed that you didn't write the actual AP for a harqebus... but I suppose it is AP2?

It's right there on Page 24 on the Missile Weapon Chart. And on the summary sheet at the end. I guess I can put it in the text...

Finished rules for the Salamander, though I still need some good ideas for making slanns awesome mages...

It depends on how awesome - and how much you want to spend points-wise.

An easy one would be to give them the Book of Knowledge as a standard ability - they can always use two schools of magic. This then lets them buy other magic items. You could also say that they are always Master Wizards, and boost their base cost by 50%. Now this would make them a little cheaper than other wizards, but since they have to buy the Book of Knowledge and there's no other option, it probably balances out.

My hope to get a revised edition up today is wildly optimistic. I'm going to try to make it happen this week, but things are super busy around here. When it rains, it pours.

[Idle Scholar]

I've been following your discussions with interest and been writing my own little addendum to to Conqueror, to be able to re-fight the battles of the English Civil War. I'm only putting them up here for now so if you disapprove I'll take them down and won't share them further on the interweb.

[Commissar von Toussaint]

One word:

AWESOME.



Looking it over, here are my suggestions.

The first is having pikes attack first.

I had this in the very first version of my rules and called it "priority."

The problem with it was that it really didn't matter and slowed the game down.

If a unit of 20 swordsmen charge a unit of 20 pikes, and each have a five-man front, the pikes at most will kill 10 swordsmen. The remaining ranks will still move forward and then strike.

Turned out that "priority" was only significant when you had small, beaten-down units. Otherwise it was a waste. So I got rid of it.

Also, make sure you are clear between "shaken" and "disordered." Shaken units have lost a certain percentage and never become "unshaken." Disorder is a morale state. I know it is confusing, but I'm trying to keep them separate.

While I'm here, the newest version is up at the web site. Hit the link below and be amazed.

Why bother? Well, I've got the revised point values, cleaned up stuff (yet again ) but also added some scenario ideas. Oh, and "thrown weapons" are now used during melee combat (sort of - read it and find out!).

It's close, really close.

Which brings me to the next phase: getting it published. Any thoughts?

[Idle Scholar]

I'm glad you like them

I'm not sure whether to replace the pike rule with:

"Pikes give +1 MS"

or

"Pikes cause opponents to halve their attacks rounded down"

or

"A unit fighting a pike block rolls its attacks after the pike block and loses the number of attacks equal to the number of models killed by the pike block"

Also I've updated the other Pike rule to:

"Pikes revert to hand weapons in difficult terrain, or against opponents attacking their flanks or rear, or against opponents also equipped with pikes attacking the front."

The intention is not just to make pikes extra killey, but also fairly safe to wield against other non pike units without giving them a good save or awesome combat skills. Also as it's a very directional thing it nees to be 'special rulled' as they need to be soft and squishy in the flanks or rear.

I'm also debating whether to reduced the number of turns of shooting available to muskets to 3, as with an 18" range it's entirely possible there won't be any shooting until turn 2, and I want the last two turns to be all about the close combat.

As to getting published, I'd guess your best bet would be to contact a miniature company, wargames magazine or wargames/roleplaying publishing company in that order. Take the recent Black Powder release through Warlord Games. If nothing else dropping them an e-mail asking for advice wouldn't be a bad move. You can also self publish but without sufficient advertising you aren't going to sell very many. Assuming of course you want some financial return above just getting people to play the rules.

[Archdaimon]

Another option for publishing is going to the indie rpg environment. Then sell it online as a pdf... I think that would be the best option.

[Commissar von Toussaint]

I'm glad you like them

The intention is not just to make pikes extra killey, but also fairly safe to wield against other non pike units without giving them a good save or awesome combat skills. Also as it's a very directional thing it nees to be 'special rulled' as they need to be soft and squishy in the flanks or rear.

The rules I have for pikes pretty much do what you want. It may not look like it at first glance, but they're pretty good at what they do.

Pikes fight in two ranks, which gives them a huge advantage against other infantry. Spears do this, but pikes get that extra AP 1.

In a game without toughness, this is a serious advantage.

If pikes can "set" against a charge, they are now AP 2. This makes charging them with cavalry suicidal.

The weakness of pikes over spears is that you can't use a shield. Of course by this time, no one was using shields so that's moot.

The other weakness that both pikes and spears share is the flank/rear attack.

As the rules for each weapon states (7.2 Melee Weapon Descriptions), if they are attacked to the flank/rear they may not "set" and lose their rank bonus. I should add that pikes also lose their AP 1. (Basically I can clean this up by saying that they can't be used, period. Again, just when I thought I was finished...).

Also keep in mind that flank/rear attacks absolutely destroy morale. If your pikes get hit on the side, they are doomed. But if they are facing you, things will get nasty.

I should also mention that pikes and spear can't "set" against infantry. So your pike-on-pike fights will be bloody and ultimately decided by the skill/morale differential.

I'm also debating whether to reduced the number of turns of shooting available to muskets to 3, as with an 18" range it's entirely possible there won't be any shooting until turn 2, and I want the last two turns to be all about the close combat.

Play a short game or block one out before you really get into this.

Harquebuses can get a few volleys off, but if you screen your main columns with skirmishers, they won't accomplish much. Remember, all shooting attacks are halved, so 10 musketeers will only get three volleys before engagement. The maximum possible models they can hit is 15. Odds are they will get far less. (Oh, and don't forget the puffs of cotton after each volley. )

The upshot is that a 30-man pike unit will probably take only 3-7 kills as they approach.

From my own games, Empire handgunners had a very limited effect on other infantry. They were best used on high-value targets.

As to getting published, I'd guess your best bet would be to contact a miniature company, wargames magazine or wargames/roleplaying publishing company in that order. Take the recent Black Powder release through Warlord Games. If nothing else dropping them an e-mail asking for advice wouldn't be a bad move. You can also self publish but without sufficient advertising you aren't going to sell very many. Assuming of course you want some financial return above just getting people to play the rules.

Money would be nice, but really I just want to play a decent fantasy game. I'll probably see if I can get any miniatures companies to bite first.

[Commissar von Toussaint]

I'm going to try to post a battle report in the next few days, just to mix things up a bit.

Having said that, I'll probably get buried at work and disappear for a fortnight.

[Idle Scholar]

I've played through a test game, and on the whole it worked quite nicely. There's a few ambiguous edges but generally speaking horse, infantry and artillery worked really well together.
The biggest problem was that the cavalry ended up being too vulnerable on the charge.
A fully loaded twenty strong steady musket block will only just lose to a unit of ten steady carouseling Harquebusiers, and will gut the cavalry unit while doing so. The trouble is if the cavalry doesn't destroy infantry easily on the charge then there's no need for the musket to run for the pike. Really the cavalry needs to take less hits and possibly do more damage so I'm considering giving them +1 MS on the turn they charge, which is negated by set pikes.

A couple of general rules questions also came up. The first was can a unit rally, or shake of disordered it it broke or became disordered that turn?

The second was that what happens when a unit can charge an enemy, but in doing so the rear ranks clip another unit?

[Commissar von Toussaint]

I've played through a test game, and on the whole it worked quite nicely. There's a few ambiguous edges but generally speaking horse, infantry and artillery worked really well together.
The biggest problem was that the cavalry ended up being too vulnerable on the charge.
A fully loaded twenty strong steady musket block will only just lose to a unit of ten steady carouseling Harquebusiers, and will gut the cavalry unit while doing so. The trouble is if the cavalry doesn't destroy infantry easily on the charge then there's no need for the musket to run for the pike. Really the cavalry needs to take less hits and possibly do more damage so I'm considering giving them +1 MS on the turn they charge, which is negated by set pikes.

You are correct about the MS being a problem, but I think there is an easier (and more realistic) solution: Lower the base MS for your missile uints.

WHFB gives missile units good WS because it's a freebie - WS really doesn't matter, ranks and the flag are what win the combats (that and special rules, extra attacks, etc.).

But the reality is that archers aren't good at melee combat. That's not what they train for and that's not what they are equipped for. This is even more the case in an era where the musketeers' entire plan is to run to another unit if charged.

Missile troops in general should have an MS at least one level lower than their SS. So your raw troops should be MS 1, steady should be MS 2, and so on. This will shift the odds nicely.

A couple of general rules questions also came up. The first was can a unit rally, or shake of disordered it it broke or became disordered that turn?

Yes. I will add a sentence explicitly stating this, but the lack of a prohibition was on purpose. The idea is that a low-morale unit could charge, lose, rout and then rally so that it could come back for more the next turn. Basically it allows inferior troops to do "human wave" style assaults.

The second was that what happens when a unit can charge an enemy, but in doing so the rear ranks clip another unit?

I'm having a little difficulty visualizing this.

Generally, when a unit charges, you see if it can make it and then center it up. If centering it puts the back rank into contact (because it flares out), then shift the target unit a little to avoid that. I'll put a comment or something to remind people that this shouldn't be a game of millimeters but rather blocks of troops who, in the stresses of combat, will not keep parade-perfect formations.

Now if there's simply no room, then the charge can't be made. Basically the unit can't squeeze into the opening. The commanders on the field would know how much space their unit uses up and wouldn't order a charge that put their flank or rear into contact with an enemy unit.

[Archdaimon]

Do you have any notes for warriors of chaos? Id like to see what you came up wioth before I make my own list.

On the first page i can see that you wanted spears used with two hand to have ap1. You quit that thought later?

[Idle Scholar]

Hmm, musketeers did frequently enter H2H, turning their guns around and using the heavy butts as clubs with great effect. Given that I've limited them to three turns of shooting making them too rubbish in combat might be a bit prohibitive. Still as you say an adjusted MS might do the trick without too much in the way of rules convolutions.

.......................EEEEE
.......................EEEEE
.......................EEEEE
MMMMM..PPPPP..MMMMM
MMMMM..PPPPP..MMMMM
MMMMM..PPPPP..MMMMM

This is the sort of situation I was talking about. The pike want to assist the musketeers on their right but it seems they either have to charge corner to corner or can't charge at all.

[Idle Scholar]

Ok here's the new version. Most of the changes are clarifications about the pike and shotte square. Basically when instead of faffing with re-organising a lot of models musket blocks that shelter in the square are simply removed from the table for the duration.

I'm going to go with giving cavalry +1 MS on the charge for now,as I think that better represents the temporary effect of a cavalry charge giving them more attack and defence at the same time.

It's probably still full of typos but hey, see what you think