Close combat tactical diversity

[Emud]

One thing has occured to me. Maby this is nothing new, but I find it very annoying.

There is on general no real tactical diversity in warhammer, as far as the close combat mechanic is concerned. All units (except spears) perform better when charging.

Spears is really a marginal exception, because the only viable choice that makes it better is if you use shields with it (otherwise additional hand weapons are equally good). And even then, if faced against a hard hitting foe they will not perform good, because their power lies in their hit-back capability. And not all spear units perform especially good when charged either.

If you take one particular unit and ask what is it's best useage, the answer is always going to be charging. It is no wonder things tend to go towards hit-power, since that is the only viable choice.

What I am annoyed about is while unit A might be better than unit B to take a charge, unit A would still be better used to charge with. If you have 10 units, what is the best tactic? Easy! Always try to charge with all.

I think the tactical variations would be much greater if some units actually were better at recieving charges than charging.

[Ultimate Life Form]

Have you ever tried High Elves?

[Emud]

I was going to say that an exception to the spears exception is if you always strike first, but that would really be an exception then

I agree HE are special, but I was more thinking of the general mechanic.

[Keller]

Some of the older units made more sense to recieve charges (Pikes, for example) but I think you may be over simplifying things a bit. The point of the game is to outmanuver so you can charge, getting all the benefits that goes with it. The other side of that, is finding ways to make your opponent miss charges, or charge things which you have chosen to allow to be charged, so that you can counter later on.

Sure, any one unit is going to be better on the charge, but its about moving everything to react to how the battle unfolds, whether you can charge or not.


If you want units that will wantingly recieve charges, look into the Empire. Their parent infantry units get support detachments which can counter enemies who charge them.

Large blocks of soldiers w/ spears/halberiders/shields set up to recieve charges, then their militia/soldier detachment flank charges them (as a charge reaction) while the archers/crossbow/handgunners can stand and fire against the charging unit w/o penalty or fear for their own saftey. I welcome most charges on my spearmen blocks for this reason.

Originally Posted by Ultimate Life Form

Have you ever tried High Elves?

Personally, I think HE's ASF ability really makes the game boring. There is no reason to worry about charging instead of being charged, except to negate impact hits and lances/spears. If you are squaring up against an enemy as a HE, just walk right up to them and let them charge, it doesn't matter.

[Ultimate Life Form]

Originally Posted by Keller

If you are squaring up against an enemy as a HE, just walk right up to them and let them charge, it doesn't matter.

EXCEPT if you want to overrun which is another charge bonus as I found out. It tends to be forgotten in case of High Elves. It's psychological warfare at it's best.

Also, my friend is always very happy when her Wild Riders are being charged. It's not like she provokes it, but in case it happens, she joyfully declares 'they're better in being charged', and the Wild Riders usually answer her call and start flailing around like mad.

[sulla]

Originally Posted by Keller

Personally, I think HE's ASF ability really makes the game boring. There is no reason to worry about charging instead of being charged, except to negate impact hits and lances/spears. If you are squaring up against an enemy as a HE, just walk right up to them and let them charge, it doesn't matter.

While this is indeed true, in the previous editon there was never any reason to accept a charge with Elves of the white or bklack-cloaked varieties. If you look at DE, there's still no reason to hold unless you are either ASF or have an ASF assassin in there (hence why nobody seems to take infantry other than ASF or bolstered by an assassin. Anything else will almost certainly lose, be broken and possibly run down.

HE ASF just highlights the problem that infantry generally can't recieve a charge anymore. Well, t3 and/or poor armour anyway. They stand out because they can.

[Emud]

Well Empire and HE examples are special cases. What I meant was about the core mechanic.

Also the argument about manouvering fails I think. The tactical variations would still be greater if some units could recieve charges. It would not mean less manouvering or less trying to trick your opponent.

[Malorian]

It's all about the manouvering.

When you have ten units against 10 units you obviously want them all to charge but that just isn't possible unless your opponent was dropped as a child, so the only way to get things in your favour (other than matching up the paper/rock/scissors) is to use manouvering and baiting tactics.

[Avian]

Originally Posted by Emud

There is on general no real tactical diversity in warhammer, as far as the close combat mechanic is concerned. All units (except spears) perform better when charging.

That depends on what you mean by performance. A lot of units do perform better when receiving a charge, but that is in the context of getting the enemy unit into an unfavourable position where it can be flanked, tarpitted or isolated. Only a charging unit can overrun, but it is the placement of the charged unit that dictates the direction of the overrun.

But if you are equating performance simply with killing the other guy, then it is nearly always better to hit him before he hits you, and you do that when charging (most of the time, anyway).

From a games mechanics perspective, the charge bonus is there to encourage armies to move across the table. If enough units fought better when not charging, there is a risk that the game could end up being quite stale.
Take powerful close combat units with ASF, for example. With no (or at least a greatly reduced) charge bonus, there is little reason for me to charge them unless I have something that strikes even sooner than they do or I have something so tough and nasty that it doesn't matter that I don't go first. Instead I play the much more dull "avoid-and-shoot" game.

[Emud]

Originally Posted by Malorian

It's all about the manouvering.

When you have ten units against 10 units you obviously want them all to charge but that just isn't possible unless your opponent was dropped as a child, so the only way to get things in your favour (other than matching up the paper/rock/scissors) is to use manouvering and baiting tactics.

Yea. But would not the diversity be greater if some units were better at reciveing charges than charging?

Would not that mean MORE manouvering?

[Keller]

Originally Posted by Emud

Yea. But would not the diversity be greater if some units were better at reciveing charges than charging?

Would not that mean MORE manouvering?

Certainly not for those units. Any unit which preforms better upon being charged would benefit from staying stationary in the front of the army, allowing you time to dwindle enemies with ranged attacks while awaiting the enemy to engage you. You'd have little reason to be tactical with these units, since you actually want them to be charged. The only thing you would have to worry about is protecting flanks and the like, but that would be easy with several of such units in a line with no cause to break formation.

[EvC]

Yeah, those games where you put a tempting unit in front of a powerful enemy unit and prepare to receive the chaege, then counter-flank charge them in your own turn... no tactics there, no sir!

[Souppilgrim]

Originally Posted by Emud

Yea. But would not the diversity be greater if some units were better at reciveing charges than charging?

Would not that mean MORE manouvering?

Well sometimes it would result in two units that are good at taking charges just staring at each other.

[R Man]

Not to mention, that there are units that are good at taking charges, maybe not statistically better than if they attack, but still good anyway, especially in army context. A good example is most of the Dwarvern Army.

[Malorian]

Originally Posted by Souppilgrim

Well sometimes it would result in two units that are good at taking charges just staring at each other.

Ever see two dogs of war armies face each other?

Those pikemen NEVER move

[Emud]

Originally Posted by Avian

That depends on what you mean by performance. A lot of units do perform better when receiving a charge, but that is in the context of getting the enemy unit into an unfavourable position where it can be flanked, tarpitted or isolated.

I mean only combat result. I am programming an app where I calculate unit scores depending on tactical situations. I wrote about it in another tread if you remember.

I agree to what you say, but let me make a comparision. In chess the queen is worth 15 and a pawn is worth 1, in terms of might on the chessboard. Therefore the queen to pawn trade would be very unfavourable. It has higher purpouses, so to say. By measuring a units performance in warhammer you get a lot of information, tactical situations included, not only combat result.

Originally Posted by Avian

From a games mechanics perspective, the charge bonus is there to encourage armies to move across the table. If enough units fought better when not charging, there is a risk that the game could end up being quite stale.

I agree. This has more to do with winning conditions in my opinon though.

Originally Posted by Keller

Certainly not for those units. Any unit which preforms better upon being charged would benefit from staying stationary in the front of the army, allowing you time to dwindle enemies with ranged attacks while awaiting the enemy to engage you. You'd have little reason to be tactical with these units, since you actually want them to be charged. The only thing you would have to worry about is protecting flanks and the like, but that would be easy with several of such units in a line with no cause to break formation.

So spear units are not tactical? Spear units perform better being charged.

What I miss is units able to take charges better by surviving, not killing in defensive situations.

And perform better does not necessarily mean outperform, especially if it is only the surviving part that is improved when being charged. That unit would have equally good killing power if charging.

It also depends a lot on which unit you are facing, so therfoe I think manouvering has very much to do with it.

[theunwantedbeing]

Like how wild riders get +1 attack on a turn where they didnt charge?
or how misslie weapon armed troops can stand and shoot?

Or are you wanting things that provide a bonus in subsequent rounds?
As that would make them better at defense than offence, without nessecarily meaning they are going to sit there and get shot at hoping the enemy charges into them.

[Keller]

Originally Posted by Emud

So spear units are not tactical? Spear units perform better being charged.

I would say that spears are better when other units when they are charged, but they are still better if they charge than receiving one. Any time you can strike first, killing enemies before they have a chance to kill you, you are better off. Sure, the spears lose an extra rank of attacks when they charge, but they will get all of their attacks in the first round by going first (against most enemies). compare that with a unit of Khorne Warriors charging into a unit of spearmen. You'd be lucky to get any attacks back, even with the second rank being able to fight.

No matter how many attacks back you get, you still have to overcome the CR racked up by the enemy anyway.

And lets not forget that by charging, you deny the enemy charge bonuses, such as lances and impact hits.

The only unit which I would say is truely best when being charged is HE Spear-elves. 3 ranks which strike first, compared to only 2 if they charge the enemy.

Originally Posted by Emud

What I miss is units able to take charges better by surviving, not killing in defensive situations.

I think I know what you mean, despite the despute about being charged.

It just boils down to the game changing to being more about dynamic combat resolution, those earned through kills, than the static res that 6th ed was so reliant on. Now, units are getting more deadly than ever, with models have multiple attacks, high strength, and boatloads of rules. Standing up in combat by not killing is falling by the wayside. Its all about killing as many models as possible, with less emphasis on having defensive units who can soak up damage. I guess the best defense is a good offense, leaving no one left to attack you back.


But lets face it. Having models locked in combat unable to do damage to each other is boring. Seeing all of your attacks bounce off of armor is extremely dismaying, so perhaps it is better that units just shred each other and move on, possibly speeding up the game.

[Emud]

Originally Posted by Keller

I would say that spears are better when other units when they are charged, but they are still better if they charge than receiving one. Any time you can strike first, killing enemies before they have a chance to kill you, you are better off. Sure, the spears lose an extra rank of attacks when they charge, but they will get all of their attacks in the first round by going first (against most enemies).

Not true. This is only better if the enemys average wounds inflicted are greater than the whole front rank of the spear unit (usually 5). Spears are situational, but on average better at being charged. Denying charge bonus is easily compared to the chance of wiping the whole front rank.

Originally Posted by Keller

But lets face it. Having models locked in combat unable to do damage to each other is boring. Seeing all of your attacks bounce off of armor is extremely dismaying, so perhaps it is better that units just shred each other and move on, possibly speeding up the game.

Yes, perhaps. But you miss what I am saying. I am talking about tactical diversity. Not ONLY defesive units vs defensive units.

You could try and lock down flanks for example, or try and hold a unit to countercharge in the flank, or bypass it completley, or try and hold a particular strong enemy unit from doing more damage elsewhere. What I mean is defence can be used in offensive tactics. There are probably hundreds of uses. Not saying units that are good at charging cannot complete this task, it's just not their primary job to do it.

And again, completley locking is not what i talk about. These units would not be bad at charging, only relativley better at being charged.

[rtunian]

you are talking about broad theory. you are asking "what if the dynamic were different", but really what use is that?

instead of arguing with every person who has an opinion about your complaint, why don't you try to define what you would do differently? why don't you think about how you would implement those changes? why don't you actually playtest them and report back with some results?

about chess: in chess, both sides have equal, identical forces. that is part of the nature of chess. in warhammer, both sides have different forces with different compositions, different strengths/weaknesses, and are often far from equal. if you wanted warhammer to mirror chess (which would ruin warhammer imo), then you'd have to make the opposing forces static and identical.