The all powerful Initiative

  • The whole problem lies it two things:
    In actual combat in the initial stage who has the longer weapon attacks first
    Some fighters are harder to hit but also hit more rarely (they are cautious and defensive) while others hit often but also expose themselves to attacks.

    Now for the solution:
    WS is for hitting
    I is for defending
    So you hit with your WS against enemy I and therefore elves are hard to hit (lets say I5-6) but since they are cautious hit moderately well (WS4-5) now orc can hit also quite well but is reckless and gets hit far more often (WS3-4, I2-3)

    Now who hits first:
    Weapons should have range tiers:
    claws-0
    hand weapon-1
    Great weapon-2
    Pole arm (halberd, lance)-3
    Spear/Pike-4
    Now in the first round of combat who has longer weapon attacks first, then in subsequent rounds units are mixed together so length of the weapon stops making difference (like in actual combat)

    Also I'm all for changing great weapons/lances to lower str if that is followed with overall armor save reduction (and what would be best decoupling str with ap)

    PS: since some people seem to miss the point: I becomes completely different stat (lets call id parry WS or whatever and should be then readjusted for every model in the game). Striking first is determined by the weapon. So please do not bring points like: dwarves would be hit on X or this unit would be whatever. That is a core rule change which makes game more logical so obviously all models should be reconsidered in the way they work.

    PS2: @DJWoodelf What do you think of the idea? Especially that it gives a nice way to differentiate between races feeling (elves harder to hit but still hitting quite well, WoTG hitting really well but more careless, orcs good in offense but terrible in defense or anything that makes sense, also that would be a good starting point to changing to hit table as there would be 2 stats governing it in the same way as S and T)

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Adam ().

  • Marcos24 wrote:

    what's wrong charging units getting to strike first.
    because it kills high point cost, low number and low durability units and MSU/MMU rosters.

    additionally it makes certain choices even stronger that dont really need it.

    you want to change initiative? then you first need to fix the initial problem that some stats have soft and other hard scaling while weapon choices can give you increased stats with hard scaling but units still pay premium for ALL base stats...

    you dont have a solution for that? then you are out of luck.
  • Adam wrote:

    The whole problem lies it two things:
    In actual combat in the initial stage who has the longer weapon attacks first
    Some fighters are harder to hit but also hit more rarely (they are cautious and defensive) while others hit often but also expose themselves to attacks.

    Now for the solution:
    WS is for hitting
    I is for defending
    So you hit with your WS against enemy I and therefore elves are hard to hit (lets say I5-6) but since they are cautious hit moderately well (WS4-5) now orc can hit also quite well but is reckless and gets hit far more often (WS3-4, I2-3)

    Now who hits first:
    Weapons should have range tiers:
    claws-0
    hand weapon-1
    Great weapon-2
    Pole arm (halberd, lance)-3
    Spear/Pike-4
    Now in the first round of combat who has longer weapon attacks first, then in subsequent rounds units are mixed together so length of the weapon stops making difference (like in actual combat)

    Also I'm all for changing great weapons/lances to lower str if that is followed with overall armor save reduction (and what would be best decoupling str with ap)
    then all dwarves would be Hit by everything in 3+ or 2+... Great idea...

    I and WS should be 2 different thing. Ding change Basic Game mechanics to solve such an issue. ^^
  • Beardling wrote:

    Adam wrote:

    The whole problem lies it two things:
    In actual combat in the initial stage who has the longer weapon attacks first
    Some fighters are harder to hit but also hit more rarely (they are cautious and defensive) while others hit often but also expose themselves to attacks.

    Now for the solution:
    WS is for hitting
    I is for defending
    So you hit with your WS against enemy I and therefore elves are hard to hit (lets say I5-6) but since they are cautious hit moderately well (WS4-5) now orc can hit also quite well but is reckless and gets hit far more often (WS3-4, I2-3)

    Now who hits first:
    Weapons should have range tiers:
    claws-0
    hand weapon-1
    Great weapon-2
    Pole arm (halberd, lance)-3
    Spear/Pike-4
    Now in the first round of combat who has longer weapon attacks first, then in subsequent rounds units are mixed together so length of the weapon stops making difference (like in actual combat)

    Also I'm all for changing great weapons/lances to lower str if that is followed with overall armor save reduction (and what would be best decoupling str with ap)
    then all dwarves would be Hit by everything in 3+ or 2+... Great idea...
    I and WS should be 2 different thing. Ding change Basic Game mechanics to solve such an issue. ^^
    They have parry and shieldwall, don't they?

    So more like be hit at 4+ and still have a 5++/6++ ward save.

    I think the idea has merit, i like it a lot. Adjustments would have to be made but we would have a much coherent game. It even makes viable MSU of great weapon units for elves enjoyment.
    Visit our blog, The Gates of Kislev!
  • Adam wrote:

    The whole problem lies it two things:
    In actual combat in the initial stage who has the longer weapon attacks first
    Some fighters are harder to hit but also hit more rarely (they are cautious and defensive) while others hit often but also expose themselves to attacks.

    Now for the solution:
    WS is for hitting
    I is for defending
    So you hit with your WS against enemy I and therefore elves are hard to hit (lets say I5-6) but since they are cautious hit moderately well (WS4-5) now orc can hit also quite well but is reckless and gets hit far more often (WS3-4, I2-3)

    Now who hits first:
    Weapons should have range tiers:
    claws-0
    hand weapon-1
    Great weapon-2
    Pole arm (halberd, lance)-3
    Spear/Pike-4
    Now in the first round of combat who has longer weapon attacks first, then in subsequent rounds units are mixed together so length of the weapon stops making difference (like in actual combat)

    Also I'm all for changing great weapons/lances to lower str if that is followed with overall armor save reduction (and what would be best decoupling str with ap)
    Genuinelly, i think this solution is spot on. We know there are brb changes in the works and this kind of very original amendment to the functioning of the current soft stats is exactly the kind of the that needs to be considered.

    Bravo
  • 2cents:

    1. Charging and initiative:
    IMO, a general initiative for charging or even attacking first when charging, doesnt make sense. Charging an enemy can lead to specific impact bonuses or other things.
    But it doesnt and shouldnt influence the determination of attacking order.
    Running into the enemy is no synonym of actually attacking first. The charged enemy has time to prepare for the impact, at least if he is charged to the front.
    What I would prefer to see is maybe a slight reduction of the high initiative stats of some races/units and instead let weapons also influence the initiative:
    - mounted units get initiative bonus when charging with long weapons
    - unmounted units with long weapons get initiative bonus when being charged
    - paired weapons need something completely different. Doesnt make sense at all that a model with two hand weapons attacks before the same model with a spear. IMO a totally weird and wrong rule design to buff paired weapons.

    2. Initiative as "defensive WS".
    Initiative mostly represents the ability to quickly react to an action.
    So, I agree that this influences the ability to prevent to be hit, BUT it's not THE determining factor.
    It's not only reaction, it's also or even mostly the skill.
    If we had a split of WS into offense combat skill and defense combat skill, the defense combat skill should IMO not be the Initiative, while I agree that the initiative of a being should influence the determination of the defense combat skill.
    Higher Initiative = higher defense combat skill BUT NOT, initiative = defense combat skill

    Rules Support

    Local Moderator


    Finally it's there: "TOTAL WAR - The Ninth Age - Realm of the Sylvan Elves"
  • Beardling wrote:

    if parry still Works the same u instantly kill all Low I units with GW. What would be the Point adjustment for kingsguard. Elite 30pts model WS5 with GW but beeing Hit on 3+ by everything? 2+ for everyone with an bonus like wrath or ligthning reflects???? U solve one "Problem" to create another.
    Did you even read my post? First of all why would you assume that parry works the same? Also why would they have the same I as they have now? I would be totally different stat then so obviously it would have to be adjusted for all models
  • Beardling wrote:

    if parry still Works the same u instantly kill all Low I units with GW. What would be the Point adjustment for kingsguard. Elite 30pts model WS5 with GW but beeing Hit on 3+ by everything? 2+ for everyone with an bonus like wrath or ligthning reflects???? U solve one "Problem" to create another.
    Easy to solve.

    - KingsGuard, come with shield and Gw as default. Get Weapon Master.

    Use your GW or Shield depending whats better in the situation. Or even use shield to absorb the charge damage, then change to GW when reach doesn't matter to obliterate your opponent, or stay in shield and conserve points while grinding.
    Visit our blog, The Gates of Kislev!
  • DJWoodelf wrote:

    2. Initiative as "defensive WS".
    Initiative mostly represents the ability to quickly react to an action.
    So, I agree that this influences the ability to prevent to be hit, BUT it's not THE determining factor.
    It's not only reaction, it's also or even mostly the skill.
    If we had a split of WS into offense combat skill and defense combat skill, the defense combat skill should IMO not be the Initiative, while I agree that the initiative of a being should influence the determination of the defense combat skill.
    Higher Initiative = higher defense combat skill BUT NOT, initiative = defense combat skill
    And why not?

    Initative is a non binary stat for a binary performance thats wrong in so many levels. Why we have to maintain it?

    Rename initiative as Defensive Skill

    Tie who attacks first in round one to weapons reach. Round 2 is melee, everybody attacks at same time. Or two ini values for weapons:

    First round
    claws-0
    hand weapon-1
    Great weapon-2
    Pole arm (halberd, lance)-3
    Spear/Pike-4

    Other rounds:
    claws-4
    hand weapon-3
    Great weapon-2
    Pole arm (halberd, lance)-1
    Spear/Pike-0

    Less stats, less complicated, more coherent, same depth.
    Visit our blog, The Gates of Kislev!
  • Kratos wrote:

    DJWoodelf wrote:

    2. Initiative as "defensive WS".
    Initiative mostly represents the ability to quickly react to an action.
    So, I agree that this influences the ability to prevent to be hit, BUT it's not THE determining factor.
    It's not only reaction, it's also or even mostly the skill.
    If we had a split of WS into offense combat skill and defense combat skill, the defense combat skill should IMO not be the Initiative, while I agree that the initiative of a being should influence the determination of the defense combat skill.
    Higher Initiative = higher defense combat skill BUT NOT, initiative = defense combat skill
    And why not?
    Initative is a non binary stat for a binary performance thats wrong in so many levels. Why we have to maintain it?

    Rename initiative as Defensive Skill

    Tie who attacks first in round one to weapons reach. Round 2 is melee, everybody attacks at same time. Or two ini values for weapons:

    First round
    claws-0
    hand weapon-1
    Great weapon-2
    Pole arm (halberd, lance)-3
    Spear/Pike-4

    Other rounds:
    claws-4
    hand weapon-3
    Great weapon-2
    Pole arm (halberd, lance)-1
    Spear/Pike-0

    Less stats, less complicated, more coherent, same depth.
    ...because we dont play a historical warfare game just with humans who more or less have the same reflexes (=defensive mechanism) and acceleration of moving/striking (= offensive and defensive mechanism).

    Just imagine a vampire would attack after a skeletton with a spear!?
    The skeletton would be cut in half before even having started to move the arms to actually strike.

    Initiative is much more than just reaction to something. It's also the will to do something. The courage to act. The acceleration of muscle to move or strike.

    But nevertheless, I like and favor a system in which weapons influence the order of striking more but not that the weapon alone decided who strike first.

    Rules Support

    Local Moderator


    Finally it's there: "TOTAL WAR - The Ninth Age - Realm of the Sylvan Elves"
  • @DJWoodelf Still what about the idea of splitting offensive and defensive WS? Also vampire would be in range of spear first, then skellie would not hit him due to high initiative, and then would be slashed in half. I mean you cannot circumvent physics - longer reach means you are in the range faster, you can out-skill the enemy so he doesn't hit you while you are in range, but you can't go around the range.


    Fatduck wrote:

    Adam wrote:

    In actual combat in the initial stage who has the longer weapon attacks first
    I like your idea. Keep in mind though that weapons alone aren't the only thing determining reach. Size also comes into play here.
    Well may be that monstrous things would get +1 to range and towering presences +2, that seems logical so thanks for the input
  • Adam wrote:

    @DJWoodelf Still what about the idea of splitting offensive and defensive WS? Also vampire would be in range of spear first, then skellie would not hit him due to high initiative, and then would be slashed in half. I mean you cannot circumvent physics - longer reach means you are in the range faster, you can out-skill the enemy so he doesn't hit you while you are in range, but you can't go around the range.
    So much this, the vampire would have i8 and possibly distracting so the skelly will only hit on 6'.
    Visit our blog, The Gates of Kislev!
  • Adam wrote:

    @DJWoodelf Still what about the idea of splitting offensive and defensive WS?
    It's still an idea (that I favor) with advantages and disadvantages. ;)

    RT knows this suggestion like most other suggestions and will hopefully talk about it. I neither know more nor do I have access to discussion documents.



    Also vampire would be in range of spear first, then skellie would not hit him due to high initiative, and then would be slashed in half. I mean you cannot circumvent physics - longer reach means you are in the range faster, you can out-skill the enemy so he doesn't hit you while you are in range, but you can't go around the range.


    This described order of actions has one problem:
    the skellie would not attack the vampire first, even if it had a pike and the vampire just uses a knife or even his fists. Because the senses or whatever activated the action would not start before the vampire already attacked by running around/under/above the spear.


    At least this is my interpretation, which not only means reaction time but also acceleration and max speed in a short time (=few seconds, other than the movement stat).


    Otherwise if the same skeletton was charged by normal human soldiers with swords, the initiative bonus of a spear should let the skeletton either strike first or at least at the same time.


    Having a longer reach does not automatically mean that you actually attack earlier.
    Nevertheless, stats and mechanisms are abstract and might be interpreted differently.

    ...

    Rules Support

    Local Moderator


    Finally it's there: "TOTAL WAR - The Ninth Age - Realm of the Sylvan Elves"
  • cptcosmic wrote:

    Marcos24 wrote:

    what's wrong charging units getting to strike first.
    because it kills high point cost, low number and low durability units and MSU/MMU rosters.then they'd become cheaper. Then you can afford a few more bodies in anticipation of potentially losing some. Or increase movement


    additionally it makes certain choices even stronger that dont really need it. good, it will make charges and preventing charges significantly more important, require more thought and tactics

    you want to change initiative? then you first need to fix the initial problem that some stats have soft and other hard scaling while weapon choices can give you increased stats with hard scaling but units still pay premium for ALL base stats...

    you dont have a solution for that? then you are out of luck. I have been saying that rules should not have a fixed cost across the game and should be tailored per army and unit. A base cost behind the scenes, sure, but + or - points depending on the army etc. That is my solution
  • New

    Marcos24 wrote:

    cptcosmic wrote:

    Marcos24 wrote:

    what's wrong charging units getting to strike first.
    because it kills high point cost, low number and low durability units and MSU/MMU rosters.then they'd become cheaper. Then you can afford a few more bodies in anticipation of potentially losing some. Or increase movement

    additionally it makes certain choices even stronger that dont really need it. good, it will make charges and preventing charges significantly more important, require more thought and tactics

    you want to change initiative? then you first need to fix the initial problem that some stats have soft and other hard scaling while weapon choices can give you increased stats with hard scaling but units still pay premium for ALL base stats...

    you dont have a solution for that? then you are out of luck. I have been saying that rules should not have a fixed cost across the game and should be tailored per army and unit. A base cost behind the scenes, sure, but + or - points depending on the army etc. That is my solution


    @1 so you want elite armies being cheap and numerous on the table?

    @2 you are missing the point. such a rule change would make certain units stronger, units that dont need a power up.

    @3 that is not a solution, that is HALF of a bandaid. you still havent solved the fact that some stats scale better, weapons providing the best stat and that S affects two aspects of combat making it the superior choice. this only turned all the high WS and Ini elite units into regular plebs that will now go horde because they would be cheaper to field

    in short, classic case of eating the cake but wanting it too...