Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If you were good with guessing ranges it was quite hard to miss with the cannon even with the bounce. You would aim X inches in front of the back of the targets base. Especially in 7th in which a few of the monsters jumped to chariot bases that were 100mm long.

So you would aim like 6,1-7,9" in front of the large monster/chariot. On a misfire you fail ofc, 2-6" land slightly in front and 8-10" a direct hit. So 1/3 without bounce to hit on a good guess. A 6" will hit on 5/6 bounce results, a 4" on 2/3 results and a 2" on 1/2. Direct hit + bounce will thus hit 2/3 of the time on a chariot base even if counting in misfires on a 50x100mm base if you can estimate within 2". 50mm monsters were of course harder to hit and you went from a 66% to hit to a still very respectable 55% to hit. If you add engineers and/or runes to the cannons you jump it up to 78% (100mm base) and 63% (50mm base) or more(dwarves can get a bit more accuracy depending on upgrades in 6th/7th).

A dwarf cannon with upgrades in a good players hand would be hitting on the equivalent of 2+ against 100mm bases and 3+ against 50mm bases.

Every time I come to this thread to see what's going on it's a discussion about whether guessing charge and cannon range is good or not.

Klickor wrote:
If you were good with guessing ranges it was quite hard to miss with the cannon even with the bounce. You would aim X inches in front of the back of the targets base. Especially in 7th in which a few of the monsters jumped to chariot bases that were 100mm long.

So you would aim like 6,1-7,9" in front of the large monster/chariot. On a misfire you fail ofc, 2-6" land slightly in front and 8-10" a direct hit. So 1/3 without bounce to hit on a good guess. A 6" will hit on 5/6 bounce results, a 4" on 2/3 results and a 2" on 1/2. Direct hit + bounce will thus hit 2/3 of the time on a chariot base even if counting in misfires on a 50x100mm base if you can estimate within 2". 50mm monsters were of course harder to hit and you went from a 66% to hit to a still very respectable 55% to hit. If you add engineers and/or runes to the cannons you jump it up to 78% (100mm base) and 63% (50mm base) or more(dwarves can get a bit more accuracy depending on upgrades in 6th/7th).

A dwarf cannon with upgrades in a good players hand would be hitting on the equivalent of 2+ against 100mm bases and 3+ against 50mm bases.

Close. The old trick was to aim 10" (9" would give similar result) from the back of the target. Targeting a 100mm chariot base (say 4") you would miss with the following:
Artillery Dice Bounce Dice How short of target
Misfire Any Infinite
2 Misfire 4"
2 2 2"
4 Misfire 2"

That is 9/36 chance of missing. Or 27/36 chance of hitting. 75%. Halfway between 2+ and 3+ to hit.

Since monsters are usually Large Targets, it is basically if you miss your BS roll by 1 you have a 4+ chance of hitting anyway.

"guess range" is something that sounds like a fun mechanic to play a game, and it can be fun, when both players are equally bad at it.

trouble is there are so many ways to abuse it

e.g. a cannon, you cannot fire into combat, but you can fire at something beyond it from an elevated position then "guess" the range and oh would you look where that landed, what are the chances eh?

it should have been noted as an "optional" rule and left at that


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
Every time I come to this thread to see what's going on it's a discussion about whether guessing charge and cannon range is good or not.

possibly because it was one of the more contentious points of earlier editions? along with the various magic systems and some of the movement "tricks" designed to stop things fighting

Tygre wrote:


Close. The old trick was to aim 10" (9" would give similar result) from the back of the target. Targeting a 100mm chariot base (say 4") you would miss with the following:
Artillery Dice Bounce Dice How short of target
Misfire Any Infinite
2 Misfire 4"
2 2 2"
4 Misfire 2"

That is 9/36 chance of missing. Or 27/36 chance of hitting. 75%. Halfway between 2+ and 3+ to hit.

Since monsters are usually Large Targets, it is basically if you miss your BS roll by 1 you have a 4+ chance of hitting anyway.

You need to to aim exactly or slightly more than 10" away from the back of the targets base or a 10 on the artillery dice will just overshoot the target since 100mm is shorter than 4". So anything 9,9" or below is not far enough. Which is why I used 6,1"-7,9" from the front as a good targeting range. Which is 10-11,9" from the back. So a 10 on the artillery dice doesn't overshoot. You sadly can't have it so an artillery roll of 10 and an artillery roll + bounce roll equal to 6 hits the target. One is either short or the other overshoots.

Klickor wrote:

Tygre wrote:


Close. The old trick was to aim 10" (9" would give similar result) from the back of the target. Targeting a 100mm chariot base (say 4") you would miss with the following:
Artillery Dice Bounce Dice How short of target
Misfire Any Infinite
2 Misfire 4"
2 2 2"
4 Misfire 2"

That is 9/36 chance of missing. Or 27/36 chance of hitting. 75%. Halfway between 2+ and 3+ to hit.

Since monsters are usually Large Targets, it is basically if you miss your BS roll by 1 you have a 4+ chance of hitting anyway.

You need to to aim exactly or slightly more than 10" away from the back of the targets base or a 10 on the artillery dice will just overshoot the target since 100mm is shorter than 4". So anything 9,9" or below is not far enough. Which is why I used 6,1"-7,9" from the front as a good targeting range. Which is 10-11,9" from the back. So a 10 on the artillery dice doesn't overshoot. You sadly can't have it so an artillery roll of 10 and an artillery roll + bounce roll equal to 6 hits the target. One is either short or the other overshoots.

only if you are square on the front, a bit of an angle and "2 inch from the back of the base" works just fine

That is true ofc. Probably still a bit better to aim an inch further away than risk it being too close so you can possibly over shoot. Being 1" short on the initial guess is better odds of hitting than be 1" too long.

 nathan2004 wrote:
Sigh that’s not a productive attitude for this discussion and asking why you care is valid since you’ve stated you’re out.

Show me the rule on an open forum that says I have to commit to playing a game before commenting on it.


Go ahead, I'll wait.



I'm following solely to see what other bad rules are implemented and if houseruling "Charges are double move" would be enough to make the game playable. The more I see of the game, though, the more I find that dips into no-go territory. At this point it may be more pertinent to do what I was doing anyway without apparently asking for your permission to do so: see if there are brilliant rules ideas I can crib as a houserule for 6th. If that's okay with you, and the other posters who are passive-aggressively flinging poo at my posts. I wouldn't want to violate some rule where I need your approval to contribute...



Hopefully that does indeed justify my following of a thread, and kindly leave the gatekeeping at the door. It's not a good look.

please, you can't fight in here, this is the war room


/joke

 Just Tony wrote:
...

I do understand your frustration with these kinds of responses, but they are just taking the piss out of what seemed a knee-jerk reaction on your part back then. Trying to frame it as gatekeeping won't help the matter, just take it in stride and it will go away.

Why in HELL are you talking about range guessing when we already know it will never be a part of the Old World rules.

Let's rather talk about how 200+ points characters still only have 3 wounds. Meaning you have to make them unkillable via 1++/4+ saves. You can't nibble away at their wounds with bad attacks because they have none, so you have to make characters as tough as possible, where basic units have no way to hurt them.

7th was dominated by characters with 0+ AS, 1+ rerollable AS, 4+ ward save or 4+ regen. This makes the game all or nothing. Should have give them more wounds and limit the amout of armor they can take.

For what is worth, Canons should be exactly like Bolt-Throwers (add some Strength, and an extra wound, 1 to hit -> cannon takes 1 wound?).

We already know templates will be in the game, so Stone-Throwers and Mortars are already lost for me.

I wish artillery were like in AoS.

WorldEdgePlayer wrote:
Why in HELL are you talking about range guessing when we already know it will never be a part of the Old World rules.

Let's rather talk about how 200+ points characters still only have 3 wounds. Meaning you have to make them unkillable via 1++/4+ saves. You can't nibble away at their wounds with bad attacks because they have none, so you have to make characters as tough as possible, where basic units have no way to hurt them.

7th was dominated by characters with 0+ AS, 1+ rerollable AS, 4+ ward save or 4+ regen. This makes the game all or nothing. Should have give them more wounds and limit the amout of armor they can take.

its one thing AoS got right, upping the number of wounds for a bit of survivability

At some point can this thread be about news and rumours and not speculative arguments of the merits of 30 years of game system rules? Surely a discussion thread can be set up elsewhere for such things.

That's been tried multiple times. I think the mods just have up.

Or, instead of endless arguing about artillery, magic, and monsters, we speculate on things that are really important.

Like:

Will they bring back Goblin Green?

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
Or, instead of endless arguing about artillery, magic, and monsters, we speculate on things that are really important.

Like:

Will they bring back Goblin Green?

probably not as they can't trademark it

pity, its actually a really nice colour

leopard wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
Or, instead of endless arguing about artillery, magic, and monsters, we speculate on things that are really important.

Like:

Will they bring back Goblin Green?

probably not as they can't trademark it

pity, its actually a really nice colour

Just give us Grotbags Green in its place, then.

Any bets on what orcs infantry base sizes are gonna be judging by this photo?

Doesn’t look like they’ve changed at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shakalooloo wrote:

leopard wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:
Or, instead of endless arguing about artillery, magic, and monsters, we speculate on things that are really important.

Like:

Will they bring back Goblin Green?

probably not as they can't trademark it

pity, its actually a really nice colour

Just give us Grotbags Green in its place, then.

There’s somebody at the door! There’s somebody at the door!



Pretty sure Grotbags is already a trademark. Might’ve expired though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WorldEdgePlayer wrote:
Why in HELL are you talking about range guessing when we already know it will never be a part of the Old World rules.

Let's rather talk about how 200+ points characters still only have 3 wounds. Meaning you have to make them unkillable via 1++/4+ saves. You can't nibble away at their wounds with bad attacks because they have none, so you have to make characters as tough as possible, where basic units have no way to hurt them.

7th was dominated by characters with 0+ AS, 1+ rerollable AS, 4+ ward save or 4+ regen. This makes the game all or nothing. Should have give them more wounds and limit the amout of armor they can take.

Utter, utter cobblers.

Sure, character models relied on fancy saves and that? But from 6th-8th, Herohammer was kind of done. In a unit they’d prove potent. But not on their own. Typically their Attack value barely scratch Rank and Banner combat res. Even if it exceeded (which was rare), they’d need to roll really, really well to even break even.

In a unit? I’d see you coming. And being a half way decent opponent? I’d look to my own forces and consider my counter. Maybe I’d chuck two or three chariots in, and just lawnmower my way to your General’s demise. Because all those fancy saves don’t matter when I’m running your broken unit down. Maybe I’d do what I could to play a wee sub game of “keep away” and refuse to engage the character and their unit.

Am I the only one accurately recalling the trials and tribulations of playing WHFB reasonably well?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Am I the only one accurately recalling the trials and tribulations of playing WHFB reasonably well?

No, but there don't appear to be too many of us. People tend to forget that WHFB was usually won or lost in the movement phase. Just having the most guns and the killiest Death Star unit wasn't enough.

As much as I remember the ins and outs of the game quite well, having competed a lot in 6th and 7th, I also remember how important a skill was to be able to say at the right moment "Sorry, but what you are trying to do is illegal, it's clearly explained in an appendix to Gav Thorpe's article in White Dwarf from two months ago. Yeah, I know it invalidates what you were planning to achieve, but unfortunately..."

artu87 wrote:
Any bets on what orcs infantry base sizes are gonna be judging by this photo?

IF the imperial infantry are on 25x25, I guess orc infantry are on 30x30 (and boar riders on 30x60)....

I was guessing 32mm squares to match the 40k 25mm bases and 32mm bases

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Am I the only one accurately recalling the trials and tribulations of playing WHFB reasonably well?

No, but there don't appear to be too many of us. People tend to forget that WHFB was usually won or lost in the movement phase. Just having the most guns and the killiest Death Star unit wasn't enough.

Due to the breadth of options in the game, that's good as a rule of thumb but does not cover all fringe cases and match-ups that can come up in the game. My solution to 8th ed ginormous units was MSU with a virtually unkillable, virtually unbreakable Chaos Lord in a unit of Marauders. The Marauders would die easily during the first turn of combat, but after that the Chaos Lord would pretty consistently win combat by being beefed up beyond the boundaries of good taste and being able to shut down most attacks of the enemy unit. At the same time winning in the movement phase was pretty hard for my opponent because I often had more say in their movement than they did. Yeah, all of that is a Slaanesh thing, but it's in the game and something you can encounter. And most armies don't have an answer to that because the combination of capabilities is a bit out of whack, even if it's very thematic for the army.

I understand the concern that these things can crop up and the designers would do well to construct the rules right from the start to rein in such extremes. I don't necessarily agree that super buff characters shouldn't exist as long as there is a solution to them, even if that solution doesn't entail killing them. But GW should keep an eye out for unit and wargear combinations that exploit core rules to such an extent that they warp the game experience too much.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Utter, utter cobblers.

Sure, character models relied on fancy saves and that? But from 6th-8th, Herohammer was kind of done. In a unit they’d prove potent. But not on their own. Typically their Attack value barely scratch Rank and Banner combat res. Even if it exceeded (which was rare), they’d need to roll really, really well to even break even.

In a unit? I’d see you coming. And being a half way decent opponent? I’d look to my own forces and consider my counter. Maybe I’d chuck two or three chariots in, and just lawnmower my way to your General’s demise. Because all those fancy saves don’t matter when I’m running your broken unit down. Maybe I’d do what I could to play a wee sub game of “keep away” and refuse to engage the character and their unit.

Am I the only one accurately recalling the trials and tribulations of playing WHFB reasonably well?

Than you are not recalling Vampire lords with Red fury and Dread lance. 4 S7 attacks that hit automatically and for every wound you cause, you get to roll another attack. It seems you do not recall loosing 8 FREAKING dudes on a charge to single character.

You are not recalling Dark elf Assassins that took NO hero slots and had 6 WS10 ASF killing blow attacks.

You are not recalling Demon Bloodthirster with 0+ AS, 5+ WS, fly rule, terror rule and about 6 S7 hatred attacks.

You are not recalling High elf noble on a Star dragon single handedly won tournaments.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

No, but there don't appear to be too many of us. People tend to forget that WHFB was usually won or lost in the movement phase. Just having the most guns and the killiest Death Star unit wasn't enough.

Dark elf players taking a unit of 40 shades with great weapons and repeater crossbows and slamming all the characters in it was usualy enough to win. Or WoC players taking a unit of Chosen and slamming all the buffs on it was the meta. Or Empire taking 3 cannons, Hellblaster, 4 units of missle infantry and steam tank. Vampire counts with 15 power dice?

You can praise the movement phase all you want but what won the games, was the ability to remove enemy models from the board.

But you are talking the flawed 8th edition. I assume the comments about the importance of movement refer to the Golden Age of 6th-7th

None of the above ever proved especially problematic.

Take your 40 Shades. Whack all the characters in. Concentrating your points and oomph isn’t a particularly good idea. Not when you don’t get a rank bonus. Not when those 40 dudes wear no armour. Sure I got -1 to hit with ranged stuff, but they were still T3 W1 running about in their undies.

Lob a magic missile or two at them, and I’ll be forcing Panic test quite quickly. Wipe out the Shades? That’s a bunch of characters on their own. T3 Characters at that.

Vampire Lord? Good luck getting the charge. Because without the charge, that S value is greatly lessened. And unless he’s palling about with Blood Knights or Wight Cavalry? See above about lobbing a couple of Magic Missiles and ranged attacks at him.

Star Dragon? Again that’s a lot of points. I know how to use Dragons effectively. And I know how to counter them (artillery, swamp them in combat). Or, if I’m playing Gobbos? Fanatics can make super short work of big stuff.

Sure, I had to work for it. But then, I had to work for every game I ever won. Because there are no sure things.

Cyel wrote:
But you are talking the flawed 8th edition. I assume the comments about the importance of movement refer to the Golden Age of 6th-7th

The second half of 7th was decidedly not a golden age...

I don't remember "herohammer" being a major issue in 6th, 7th or 8th (compared with other egregious things) and certainly not compared with the excesses of 4th and 5th.

But 6th and 7th were defined I think by "choppy character in a cavalry bus" and cavalry in general. It is all about the movement phase - and having higher M=win.

I think its interesting that GW clearly have tried to cut down the all or nothing of combat resolution. You are I think going to see more fights go on, rather than I charge, I win by lots, you run, I catch, gg". But yes, characters are going to keep a few wounds is going to give you that strange all or nothing experience. They can have all these defences - but they can't stop "I rolled a few 6s, you rolled a few 1s, oh he's dead."

Oh, yes, the Daemons-Vampires-Dark Elves period of 7th is definitely something that started putting me off the game, and 8th sealed the deal.