The all powerful Initiative

    Post by DJWoodelf ().

    This post was deleted by the author themselves: misunderstood ().
  • Kpl.blutch wrote:

    Try to explain to an elf player, that WotDG knights get to strike before them on the charge
    you wanna play that card? let me give you a history lesson of 9th age, where at the beginning of 9th age some WotDG fanboys were flooding HBE subforum and pointing out how unfair everything is.

    was very amusing, especially when they started to whine about the swordmasters 6+ ward against BS shooting, because SM are more durable to shooting than their chosens in some super rare scenario against someone which is a total noob that shoots with his single shot bolt thrower with S6 at SM and chosens. it was even more ridiculous when SM lost this "obviously overpowered" 6+ ward against BS shooting next iteration of rules, it couldnt be more obvious...

    Arrahed wrote:

    Rhaen wrote:

    @Arrahed and you're walking straight past my point that you're crying over a scenario that only ever occurs for you against 2 other armies or a mirror match, and then only if you during play are unable to deal with that situation in any other way than letting them into CC, and then it's still only bad for you if what they get into CC with is something expensive that you wanted to use to punch something else with.

    I'm sorry, but the way I see it you're making a mountain of a molehill and complaining unnecessarily.
    I whole heartedly disagree. What about humans fighting elves? Humans fighting other humans? Elves fighting lust demons? Orcs fighting Ogres?
    It would create new tactics and list concepts and I think that would be great.

    I can imagine that lust demon players and elf players don't like the idea of a potential soft nerf but I believe it would enrich the game.
    that is exactly the same example, mirror match or against 2 other armies where it matters. :rolleyes:

    but sure, change Ini that way but then dont be butthurt afterwards when all your cheap horde armies and all high base S/T armies will get a 50% cost bump upwards :thumbsup: or do you thing you will get the ability to strike first on the charge (or atleast on the same time) for free? haha, how naive...

    The post was edited 1 time, last by cptcosmic ().

  • cptcosmic wrote:

    you wanna play that card? let me give you a history lesson of 9th age, where at the beginning of 9th age WotDG were flooding other nations subform and pointing out how unfair everything is.
    They did ? I didn't come on before december-15, and back then, all that people was crying about (well, some people), was the crushers going to a 2+ AS

    cptcosmic wrote:

    it was even more ridiculous when SM lost this "obviously overpowered" 6+ ward against BS shooting next iteration of rules, it couldnt be more obvious...
    So it worked !!! I guess HbE players learned something from that ^^

    Christoffer

    The ThieveingMick wrote:

    Kind of a build a bear workshop made of industrial murder and dead goblins
  • Rhaen wrote:

    That, and I think you're overestimating "long weapons" and their ability to strike first in combat.
    May I ask your experiences with medieval weaponry that justifies this?

    My experience that tells me otherwise is fifteen years in medieval combat recreation and some small experience fencing. And in my experience, a mere six inch difference in length is the difference between life and (simulated) death between fighters of equal skill.

    Kpl.blutch wrote:

    Arrahed wrote:

    Are there any other cases where +2 INI would sill not give a cavalry unit a useful role? If not a solution should be found for the Boar Riders specifically.
    SA raptor riders. It is not that I am against the idea, of giving lances/light lances an initiative buff, but it just gives some other problemsTry to explain to an elf player, that WotDG knights get to strike before them on the charge :)

    Christoffer
    How many WDG Knights are played at all, much less with lances?
  • @Vulcan none to regarded as medieval weapons tactics or the like.
    But enough with martial arts in varying combinations of different weapons of different lengths from unarmed to long-pole to say, yes you are right; of two fighters of equal skill the one with a longer weapon will almost always win, enough to say that even if you believe yourself more skilled than an opponent when you're unarmed and they have a small blade you don't want to take the fight without at least getting the reach advantage back.
    But there's also difference in fighting style between spears, shortswords, greatswords, etc. etc. to consider, especially in formation.
    There's a difference when fighting in a set up one on one duel with both parties starting ready at range with something like a greatsword (which I've heard weren't used very much IRL) versus someone with a shortsword and the same weapons clashing in a melee.

    And especially in a fantasy game I'm imagining overhead smashes and other outrageous swings when I think greatweapon in particular.

    As for spears, a ready spear is in general going to be about as fast as you can get it with it's long reach and since you attack by straight thrusts. But someone wielding a spear that can't backstep if parried to keep the enemy within the strike zone is about as exposed as can be if it gets to it.
  • If anything I'm more aboard the impact hits for charging cav than initiative bonus to better represent where the power of a cavalry charge lies.
    And initiative bonuses on weapons does become more problematic than "this is how it would work if you and I were to do it" when involving beings with superhuman speed and reflexes -as in which is the more significant factor, the reach of a humans spear or a vampires agility.
  • Vulcan wrote:

    Yep, which is why I don't favor LOTS of initiative modifiers for weapon length.
    But what else is there to adjust on, as long as the strike-order is based on Initiative ? But it will for sure benefit some races/units more than others
    Special rules -> Lightning reflexes ? Always strike first ? Spears already have AP(1) & Lethal strike against cavalry. And all races benefits from it
    But how many more special rules, can you pile on ?

    Christoffer

    The ThieveingMick wrote:

    Kind of a build a bear workshop made of industrial murder and dead goblins

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Kpl.blutch ().

  • Yeah, honestly, if people are really hung up specifically on the elves hitting guys with lances before they swing...


    Lance: Counts as a Hand Weapon, except the wielder gains Impact Hits (1) at their Strength +1.
    Light Lance: Counts as a Hand Weapon, except the wielder gains Impact Hits (1).

    Done. (-1 Strength, but it automatically hits and you also get to attack seems more than fair)


    I mean, there's no reason a Chariot should strike sooner than a lance charge. It really makes no sense - the lance-wielding knight is an evolution of the war chariot, not vice versa.
  • @WhammeWhamme

    That sound you just heard was every KoE player's head exploding. Yes, even the ones that hadn't read your post.


    Frankly, I LIKE the idea. The game really needs to either take the strength penalty to armor out of the game or reduce the strength of units in the game overall. I dislike that nowadays walking around in mail armor or plate armor is like walking around naked. People wore protection for a reason, after all.
  • Lol. I was joking. It'd be an interesting fix. I like the idea of Cavalry losing their strength bonus in favor of impact hits with increased strength.

    For what it's worth, my opinion is that armor penalties should be AP only. Weapons could, in SOME cases, get an AP modifier (e.g. Spears get AP1, Great weapons get AP1). The major problem with high strength everywhere is that it invalidates armor. I'd be ok with S4+ running around if it only made it easy to wound, but having strength take away armor makes things complicated. I'd be in favor of Strength not hurting armor, and having SOME weapons gain AP values (spear, great weapon, and lance are my choices). That way the armor that our units get charged for actually MEANS something (hey, it's wonderful that Highborn Elf spears have a 5+ that they pay points for. I mean, it's useless in LITERALLY EVERY GAME I PLAY, but hey, having my overcosted spears have an armor save on paper is nice). AP could go back to being (-1AS) like in GW with some things being "ignore armor saves".

    Of course, this means that characters would have to have their armor acquiring capabilities modified (if only AP modifies things, then having everyone and their pet dog run around with 2+/4++, re-roll successful wounds would be a BIT broken), and most magic weapons would have ot gain some amount of AP.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Aenarion43 ().

  • @Aenarion43 something I know is a big factor for a lot of the players I know is game speed.
    Making armor more effective would change the pacing of the game towards lasting longer, and if done without overhauling a lot of unit kits it would be something that would heavily favor already grindy units.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Emperor_Zoron: You do not question a moderator's action in public. ().

  • New

    Aenarion43 wrote:

    @WhammeWhamme

    That sound you just heard was every KoE player's head exploding. Yes, even the ones that hadn't read your post.


    Frankly, I LIKE the idea. The game really needs to either take the strength penalty to armor out of the game or reduce the strength of units in the game overall. I dislike that nowadays walking around in mail armor or plate armor is like walking around naked. People wore protection for a reason, after all.
    His proposal is actually quite similar to something we proposed way back, well before 1.0.

    RT shot it down as 'unbalanced'.