August 13 2020 05:13:10
Navigation
Forum Threads
Newest Threads
· Spears/pikes upgrade
· New Blog; Comprehens...
· New Forum Software
· Not renewing the web...
· Insane e-bay auctions
Hottest Threads
· New Blog; Compreh... [14]
· Spears/pikes upgrade [8]
· New Forum Software [5]
Latest Articles
· THE GODS OF CHAOS HA...
· Posting Content on t...
· A word on Attachments
· Final Testing and Bu...
Users Online
· Guests Online: 1

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 260
· Newest Member: MattyFenby
Welcome
Welcome to Classic Hammer
View Thread
Classic Hammer » Warhammer Fantasy » Rules Development
 Print Thread
Rank Bonus
Just Tony
So after playing a game with my brother, I'm left thinking that 7th got it right with 5 models to count as a rank. Thoughts? And if this is the case, should the Beast Herd rules be updated to accommodate?
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Geep
It's a little awkward, but I think it should depend on base size, to give an optimal total frontage (in centimetres).

Models on 20mm bases need 5 models (total 100mm)
Models on 25mm bases can have 4 models (total 100mm)
Models on 40mm+ bases can have 3 models (total 120mm+)

Cavalry would fall into the 25mm category (excluding monstrous cavalry).

Part of this is for general manoeuvrability- if we end up with overly wide units like in 8th then there's just no subtlety to moving, the game devolves into a straight 'push the models directly forward' situation.

Another part of my reasoning is for the various 6th ed units with special consideration- like the Beastherds, but also Brettonian Knights and their Lance formation (having 3 models count as a rank is nice but not OP compared to 4 models for a rank, but compared to 5 models for a rank it gets a bit better than intended).
 
TinyLegions
When was the last time that you ever saw a unit that was 4 wide? 4 models wide does make your rank bonus disappear a little faster, but not that much. I never had much of an issue with the rule from the 7th and I almost always ran dwarves.

It is a little different in WAB in that some units can turn and attack in the same movement phase. In that scenario a unit that is 4 ranks deep is now 4 wide and charging.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
Just Tony
Yeah, running Geep's ideas by my brother wound up with a firm "5 wide for everyone, no exceptions". He believes that the multiwound creatures get more than enough bonuses without having smaller frontage to gain ranks. And the more I think about it, I think I agree. Sure, that makes my Minotaur army dream evaporate, but you should have to be willing to make sacrifices to get powerful units more bonuses.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
TinyLegions
Multi-wound creatures generally win their combats through wounds, not combat resolution. Occasionally I would see an Ogre army with a few double ranked units but that extra rank bonus rarely made it to combat. Most of the time, it was so that you could get your first rank to combat, and not have your character be targeted along the way.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
Geep
One problem with having large, multi-wound creatures not gain ranks easily is that it breaks the cost/benefit ratio for new models in those units.

For example, take an average infantry unit costing 7pts per model- the first rank (5 models) is 35pts, and that's your most cost-effective size, as they're all likely to attack and contribute fully. The next rank is also 35pts- it can't attack (keeping things simple with no spears, etc.), but the +1 CR isn't bad for those points. Going up to a unit of 20 there's 105pts spent purely for +3 rank bonus- it's not too bad.

Compare this with Ogres, at 40pts per model. A front rank of 5 would cost 200pts- not cheap, but they hurt in combat and are effective! To get a rank though, that's another 200pts. That's almost 1.5x the cost of the entire human unit just for a single +1 CR- no one would be crazy enough to pay that. It's really quite bad enough that it's normally 120pts in a 3-wide unit.

You can argue that Ogres shouldn't need the ranks, and that they should rely on combat results, which is fair enough in some ways- but take a step back and think of the overall army structure. You'd be forcing Ogre Kingdoms to run MSU with Ogres, but that's still taking up a table size of at least 120mmx40mm per unit. The Ogres will get in each other's way crazily, and each small unit will be easy pickings for an opponent's tough 'anti-ogre' type units. In short, the force won't look or act like an army.

This is less of an issue for your average Troll unit, of course, as these are usually run as small units, but it's best to keep what constitutes a rank bonus as consistent as reasonably possible.

This same thinking applies, although to a slightly less extreme way, to almost all 25mm units. Cavalry are expensive. Chaos Warriors are expensive. Forcing players to pay an extra 15+ pts per rank means you'll see fewer ranks- which, to me, is a core aspect of this game!

Beastmen and Orcs are a bit of an exception to this, but there I'd argue that those troop types are a bit sub-standard anyway, and having a large base is mostly a negative, so the easier ranks is slight compensation.
 
Just Tony
I used to run a 25 man Minotaur unit counting Doombull in 7th before the crap army book came out, solely to get the rank bonus. Now they cost 40 points each, so each rank was 200 pts. In order to negate one of my rank bonuses by anything OTHER than a flank charge, you had to take out 18 wounds on T4 models. That isn't easy even with a spell heavy list. Bear in mind that unit is travelling at 12" march as well as a 12" charge. You don't have time to stop the unit getting full res, AND it causes fear so autobreak unless you roll Insane Courage. THAT is powerful, and I paid dearly for it. I think 4 wide on Ogre sized units would be fine, but definitely not 3 wide.

And why does it matter what rank size Cav get? Didn't everybody on Warseer swear up and down that 5 man Cav destroys everything on the charge?www.classichammer.com/images/smiley/wink.gif
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
HidaSeku
Geep wrote:

It's a little awkward, but I think it should depend on base size, to give an optimal total frontage (in centimetres).

Models on 20mm bases need 5 models (total 100mm)
Models on 25mm bases can have 4 models (total 100mm)
Models on 40mm+ bases can have 3 models (total 120mm+)

Cavalry would fall into the 25mm category (excluding monstrous cavalry).

Part of this is for general manoeuvrability- if we end up with overly wide units like in 8th then there's just no subtlety to moving, the game devolves into a straight 'push the models directly forward' situation.

Another part of my reasoning is for the various 6th ed units with special consideration- like the Beastherds, but also Brettonian Knights and their Lance formation (having 3 models count as a rank is nice but not OP compared to 4 models for a rank, but compared to 5 models for a rank it gets a bit better than intended).


This is the way I think it should be. Basically, needing 100mm frontage for a rank.
 
sotek222
Geep wrote:

It's a little awkward, but I think it should depend on base size, to give an optimal total frontage (in centimetres).

Models on 20mm bases need 5 models (total 100mm)
Models on 25mm bases can have 4 models (total 100mm)
Models on 40mm+ bases can have 3 models (total 120mm+)

Cavalry would fall into the 25mm category (excluding monstrous cavalry).

Part of this is for general manoeuvrability- if we end up with overly wide units like in 8th then there's just no subtlety to moving, the game devolves into a straight 'push the models directly forward' situation.

Another part of my reasoning is for the various 6th ed units with special consideration- like the Beastherds, but also Brettonian Knights and their Lance formation (having 3 models count as a rank is nice but not OP compared to 4 models for a rank, but compared to 5 models for a rank it gets a bit better than intended).


I like this best i think its fairly balanced with the total frontages being roughly equal. IMO it also matches what people typically field.
"Prepare to embrace your creators in the stygian haunts of hell, barbarian", gasped the first soldier.

"Only after you have kissed the fleeting stead of death, wretch!" returned Grignr.
 
Just Tony
Ehhhh, I'm not sold on 3 man ranks for Ogre sized models. I think that could get hairy fast.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Jump to Forum:
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Member Poll
There are no polls defined.
Shoutbox
You must login to post a message.

No messages have been posted.
1,426,923 unique visits
Table 'cmvogan_phpf1.phpf_new_users' doesn't exist