Initiative Redux

Post ideas and develop rules or stats for whatever you want in here. Asrai units as well as other races

Moderator: Council of Elders

Post Reply
User avatar
Hyarion
Elder of the Council
Posts: 4873
Joined: 19 Jun 2006, 15:08
Location: The Glade of Eternal Moonlight
Contact:

Initiative Redux

Post by Hyarion »

High Elves and Dark Elves always striking first has always struck me as being a lazy game design decision. Especially when coupled with the "ASF + >I rerolls". Which seems like an even more strange mechanic with 8th Edition's stepping up mechanic.

So if we were going to make Initiative be a more useful stat, how should it be done?

Base changes:
1) Chargers will no longer automatically strike first.
2) Great weapons will not automatically strike last.
3) All attacks will be performed in strict initiative order. Models with a tie in I will strike simultaneously.
4) The Stepping Up rule will most likely (90%) go away in our proposed experiment (unless you can make a good argument for it being retained, feel free to do so!)

Proposed new changes:
Chargers get +1I to initiative?
Great Weapons halve initiative?
Infantry Spears get +1I vs Cavalry? Or units with the Fly special rule?
Engaging an already engaged unit grants +1I?
Units winning the previous round of combat win ties in subsequent rounds?
What else?
The Warrior of the Silver Flame
I hold the Glaive of Law against the Earth.

If you refuse to capitalize on your strengths or make the most of your opponent's weaknesses, you are begging to lose.
There is no combat without movement.

Image
Gwill_of_the_Woods
Bladesinger
Bladesinger
Posts: 702
Joined: 23 Aug 2013, 10:45
Armies I play: Wood Elves, AoS - Dwarf/Empire mix
Location: Swansea, Wales

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Gwill_of_the_Woods »

They are some interesting changes! I like your ideas.

I think Initiative should play more of a role.

The re-roll to hit should have been due to high weapon skill as opposed to initiative. For example, if you had +2 weapon skill more than your opponent etc.
It would also have more of an impact on the combat dynamics.

Didn't there used to be limits to what the lower strengths could wound against the higher toughness? Maybe something like that could be re-instated and applied to weapon skill.
Long live the King in the Woods!!!
User avatar
Hyarion
Elder of the Council
Posts: 4873
Joined: 19 Jun 2006, 15:08
Location: The Glade of Eternal Moonlight
Contact:

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Hyarion »

I agree that I should play more of a role, which is why I'm doing this project (and others to come, stay tuned...).

I would probably say that if we are going to include some sort of automatic-rerolls to hit it should involve higher I *AND* double WS but that is a gut reaction not a well thought out response. I'll think about it and post something more thorough.

Yes, there were limits of what low S could wound (S+3 was the max T) in 6th and 7th edition. I've considered something like what you are proposing but it makes more sense with some other ideas I've had. Stay tuned!
The Warrior of the Silver Flame
I hold the Glaive of Law against the Earth.

If you refuse to capitalize on your strengths or make the most of your opponent's weaknesses, you are begging to lose.
There is no combat without movement.

Image
Aezeal
Wild Hunter
Wild Hunter
Posts: 1502
Joined: 22 Aug 2014, 13:54

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Aezeal »

I disagree. With the whole topic. I play PLENTY of a role... just not when playing elves VS other races... but when you look outside our race... I is plenty important.
User avatar
Hyarion
Elder of the Council
Posts: 4873
Joined: 19 Jun 2006, 15:08
Location: The Glade of Eternal Moonlight
Contact:

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Hyarion »

Fair enough, but I must admit that I don't see it. But I would appreciate your thoughts on how big a role I really plays. Unless your units are approaching the second rank (third rank for hordes) then casualties will not make an appreciable dent, if at all, in the models striking back.

But that's why I brought this question to the community at large, so I can get feedback and ideas that I wouldn't have thought of before. So let's get some discussion going.
The Warrior of the Silver Flame
I hold the Glaive of Law against the Earth.

If you refuse to capitalize on your strengths or make the most of your opponent's weaknesses, you are begging to lose.
There is no combat without movement.

Image
User avatar
hutobega
Wild Hunter
Wild Hunter
Posts: 1097
Joined: 23 May 2010, 01:33
Armies I play: Orcs and goblins, Vampire Counts, Wood Elves.
Location: Cromwell,Connecticut

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by hutobega »

The sad thing is Initiative isn't that important until the end of a long combat (If two units stay in it long enough) Once you get a unit down to its front rank and its supporting attacks (hoarded or not) thats when the initiative can make a big difference. But thats really it (and the obvious stopping elves from getting rerolls) Elves having always strike first is fine, the reroll is dumb in my opinion. great weapons striking last is fine But I feel that should still hit first on the charge I actually miss that... Having that bonus on the charge was fun! Even if it doesn't mean much with the step up rule it still made you want to get that charge +1 combat res isn't really all that great nowadays. I just have a lot of mixed feeling but not really a way to fix it or make it more worth while. I think that stats need to be looked at all over.
How do we prove we exist? Maybe we don't...
User avatar
Hyarion
Elder of the Council
Posts: 4873
Joined: 19 Jun 2006, 15:08
Location: The Glade of Eternal Moonlight
Contact:

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Hyarion »

I am in the process of rethinking stats across the board, I just decided to start with Initiative because it seemed like it had the right balance of being easy to work with and most in need of a change. Possibly even trying to move to a d10 based system (maybe, that could be more work than even I am interested in).
The Warrior of the Silver Flame
I hold the Glaive of Law against the Earth.

If you refuse to capitalize on your strengths or make the most of your opponent's weaknesses, you are begging to lose.
There is no combat without movement.

Image
Aezeal
Wild Hunter
Wild Hunter
Posts: 1502
Joined: 22 Aug 2014, 13:54

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Aezeal »

Hyarion wrote:Fair enough, but I must admit that I don't see it. But I would appreciate your thoughts on how big a role I really plays. Unless your units are approaching the second rank (third rank for hordes) then casualties will not make an appreciable dent, if at all, in the models striking back.

But that's why I brought this question to the community at large, so I can get feedback and ideas that I wouldn't have thought of before. So let's get some discussion going.
Ow I do agree that there should be a change in that little part of the hitting sequence (I've actually mentioned that on a few occasions). But apart from something like: models in the first rank that get killed cannot hit back (2nd and 3th rank can hit back) I don't think much needs to be changed.
My issue was mostly with the fact that hardhitting (small) units (usually cav) need to see more impact from their attacks (most notably the charge).

Personally I play with small units mostly so I most certainly appreciate the fact I can hit first so I can at least deal some damage.
NonnoSte
Bladesinger
Bladesinger
Posts: 904
Joined: 07 Oct 2013, 14:59
Armies I play: All kind of Elves.
Location: Turin, Italy.

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by NonnoSte »

I think that last from Aezeal is the real point.

Higher I ensures that you're hitting even if your model count is insignificant respect your opponent's.

If you park 5 Wardancers in front of 40 Skaven Slaves, you can't really expect they'll survive unscathed the fight. They're just to much to defeat entirely (I'm not speaking rulewise, but just considering the "reality"of facts).
What you can expected from 5 fighters with unnatural speed and reflexes, is that they'll do a damage before they start to suffer casualties.
And this already happens.

If slain Slaves couldn't strike back, it's possible that just 2 or 3 will be able to strike at all and they will very likely miss or just not wound. It looks quite OP for 5 elite fighters to avoid suffering any hit.

I matters a LOT in challenges for example.
When my Giant Blade Prince is able to strike before that wounded Tyrant or Vampire Lord and take him down with no harm back, It's pretty huge.
User avatar
Hyarion
Elder of the Council
Posts: 4873
Joined: 19 Jun 2006, 15:08
Location: The Glade of Eternal Moonlight
Contact:

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Hyarion »

So NonnoSte and Aezeal,

It sounds like all you guys would change is to get rid of the Stepping Up rule? Am I understanding you two correctly?
The Warrior of the Silver Flame
I hold the Glaive of Law against the Earth.

If you refuse to capitalize on your strengths or make the most of your opponent's weaknesses, you are begging to lose.
There is no combat without movement.

Image
Coyle_Ravane
Wild Hunter
Wild Hunter
Posts: 1269
Joined: 04 May 2007, 09:39
Armies I play: Wood Elves, Tau, Imperial guard (Tau auxilleries)
Location: Maidstone, Kent, England

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Coyle_Ravane »

I can't help thinking that even removing step up would be too much. Especially when you consider some of the harder hitting units around, removing 15 models and taking no attacks back is entirely feasible.

Removing it only from the first rank is very good though, it makes hitting first more significant, but not overpowered.

Personally I think WS needs overhauling more than I does, and if done well, would remove the need for things like ASF, which is a clumsy mechanic anyway.

That said, I think that having a much higher I than the opponent could replicate the effect of ASF without the weirdness of "my I is only one point higher than yours, but somehow I'm still so much faster than you that it's easy to hit you".

If having (for example) double your opponents initiative gave you a bonus to hit or to ws, that would cover the same "being fast makes it easier to hit" concept in a way which makes more sense.
Minty wrote:...if you've been killed by a Wood Elf it's nothing personal, but Charles Darwin is smiling with approval.
Image
Aezeal
Wild Hunter
Wild Hunter
Posts: 1502
Joined: 22 Aug 2014, 13:54

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Aezeal »

Hyarion wrote:So NonnoSte and Aezeal,

It sounds like all you guys would change is to get rid of the Stepping Up rule? Am I understanding you two correctly?
Stepping up:
Only partially as I said.

ASF and I
If you want to remove ASF completely (and I'm not sure I want to) then you should give weapon an I penatly/bonus:
Large weapons/2 handed: -3 I
Handweapons: normal I
Halbards -1
Spears: +1 I or -1 I? Or only +1 against cavalry? (spears should get +1 AP against cav, maybe even +2, they should be more of a real counter.. even though WH isn't a rock paper scissors game) I think the fighting in more than 3 ranks is insane too. (if they want to make elves better they should just lower the points per model instead of army rules like this. I'd prefer rules not stimulating huge units but just maxing units out at 20 or something so there are more units on the table (except for gobbo's and skaven).

The I modifier on weapons is probably to complicated. Except that spears vs cavalry thing and the ranks stuff, I'd really like that.

WS
I think the to hit table needs to be changed.
To wound is from <2+ to 6+> and to hit is <3+ to 5 +>

I'd say it should be from <2+ to 5+> or <3+ to 6+>. Wouldn't have to be another +1 to hit on every +1 WS, but maybe on 2 or something.
Or if WS is >3 higher and you roll a 6 you auto wound or get full AP (such a great hit from a superb swordsman: you hit a vital organ or slip between even the best armor).
Not sure adding more obscure rules is a good idea though, just changing the to hit table is clean and simpler.

Other stats
I don't think other stats needs changing. M, BS, S, T, W, A and LD are fine unless you want to completely revamp those parts of the game too and I really don't see a need.

Combined profiles
It's one of the few recent changes I really don't like. 10 attacks from Malekith and his dragon can't all use his magic sword and all the dragon strength. I don't need it for regular cavalry either. The current rules are not too complicated and they work IMHO. If the character needs more defending then I'd say you'd just hit the monster and kill that first before the riders can be targetted, I could see the monster getting the ward save of a character too.
User avatar
Hyarion
Elder of the Council
Posts: 4873
Joined: 19 Jun 2006, 15:08
Location: The Glade of Eternal Moonlight
Contact:

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Hyarion »

Great input, you two! Those are some great suggestions and I look forward to working them into my project.

At a glance, here is what I'm planning on including:
ASF as an army wide rule will go away, certain units may keep it as a special rule and some armies may get a magic weapon that grants ASF.

First casualties are removed from the front rank and those models may not strike back, additional casualties are removed from the back ranks. Models in second (and additional) ranks may strike back unless the additional casualties in the rear ranks removes those models. Champions and Heroes will be given special treatment as normal.

Double I grants a reroll of 1's to hit.

Individual weapons will have various I bonuses and penalties.
The Warrior of the Silver Flame
I hold the Glaive of Law against the Earth.

If you refuse to capitalize on your strengths or make the most of your opponent's weaknesses, you are begging to lose.
There is no combat without movement.

Image
Aezeal
Wild Hunter
Wild Hunter
Posts: 1502
Joined: 22 Aug 2014, 13:54

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by Aezeal »

Double I gives reroll's of 1 to hit.
Not a bad idea.. but it messes up the rules for a small bonus for something not used very often. --> more mess than usefull.
NonnoSte
Bladesinger
Bladesinger
Posts: 904
Joined: 07 Oct 2013, 14:59
Armies I play: All kind of Elves.
Location: Turin, Italy.

Re: Initiative Redux

Post by NonnoSte »

Great idea form Aezeal. I really like the idea of giving malus/bonus according to weapons.
It could be great, like +2I for Lance/Spears in cavalry charges, +1 for spearmen against cavalry charges, -3 for GW and -1 for Haleberds, where anything alse remains at 0.

To adress I effectiveness, it could be done that greater I (let's say +3) allows rerolls to hit like the actual ASF.
It would render useless rules like ASF and ASL, which seem to be one of the problems.

Anyway, just to make clear, I'm favourable to the Step Up rule. I'm with Coyle in thinking it would be OP to take it away.
Units like Wild RIders, for instance, would be able to charge anything head on with no real worry.
In all I like how the combat evolve with the current rules. It makes everything quite realistic.
Post Reply