Why not? The warriors skill in hitting stuff hasn’t changed? I know… some things are harder to hit then others since they’re faster and what not… but that should/would be represented by the models saving throw(s).
I wouldn’t have any issues with a more streamlined system without the need of a 2 page cheat sheet for basic stuff.
I really hope most of this stuff doesn’t come to pass. I want the ws table to return. I want units abilities to be reflected by stats not a million special rules. I would mix 3rd and 8th for 9th ed.
Asf should only be a magic item. Balance the armies better. Get rid of rock paper scissors kind of rules. No more of this stupid 4+ for ws3 . We are not retarded, to hit and to wound tables were incredibly easy to remember. Build a game for adults and kids will love it too. A balanced Ravening hordes is the way to go. Reduce power creep. Make light cavalry useful again
Because the opponent doesn’t just stand there and let the Chaos Warrior hit them; the old comparing WS reflects the opposed skills of the two combatants, which is why it’d be easier for the CW to hit a gobbo than an elite elf.
I had no idea 40k had moved to that, that’s really interesting.
I’m not against simplification, dropping stats and complexity was a big part of the move to 4th edition, but my thoughts on that solution is complex.
The old WS table was not very dynamic but it was not complex and at least allowed for some variation. When it comes down to it anyone can swing a sword, it’s your skill compared to the opponent that makes the difference.
That said, arguments on realism are a non-starter and ultimately lead to bickering, it’s all about how you want the game to feel on the table. If they want a quicker or more lethal system I would rather see fewer opportunities to fail (ie less dice rolls) than an increase in number of attacks or simplification of existing ones. I agree with zodd in that I do want a level of crunch beyond what’s offered in most skirmish systems. I think they should mostly focus on removing ambiguity and random charge distances (insert personal grumbling here).
Charge distances are only partially random to be fair, and I’d argue for preserving them, especially in the context of whole player turns. Charges falling short present one of the only main disruptions to a player’s planned combat sequence and with fixed predefinition would come games that are even easier to predict and therefore prone to rules manipulation. Reasonable minds may of course differ but for me unless we go to alt activations, random charge is fundamental
Respectfully disagree, of course. WHFB is both an intensely random game already and fundamentally a game of maneuver. As such, movement is one of the few things you can control and the introduction of chance here only serves to further restrict player agency.
It’s also notable that I know of only a single non-gw system that uses this mechanic. It’s not been considered a revolutionary idea, or even one worth copying, even among IGYG systems.
We had fixed charge distances in earlier editions, but that was back when you weren’t allowed to measure distances and had to guess war machine shots etc. I cannot see TOW return to this state. I’m confident we will see random charge distances. For me it’s ok. And it’s better for Dwarfs too. In 5th we had a whole 6“ charge distance. Now we have at least a chance of completing a charge…
I totally defer to your knowledge on that one as I’ve only really played late and post Fantasy. From my narrow view, fair fights are vanishingly rare and it’s relatively easy to predict the balance of odds from deployment onwards. So for me failed charges act as a potential balance to that, but it’s possible that the issue here is that once battle is joined, combat resolution rarely shocks me. On the other hand, maybe that’s a good thing.
I’m interested to hear what you think the best mechs to import would be, putting charges to one side? I know so little about other systems.
We’ve talked a bit about activation mechanics on the discord and I think that would be the easiest way to shake up the game without losing it’s identity.
I think the challenge with flat alternating activations is that it gives horde armies a distinct advantage. They are able to activate a lot of chaff to stall and force the other army to take risks or play on the defensive. This means your elite armies need to be even more elite.
Many skirmish games use an activation pool in which units can be activated multiple times but that could be difficult to transfer into a massed battle system. Ultimately though I think some sort of “action economy” should be brought in where selecting how, when, and if units activate plays an important part of the game. Perhaps tie activations or activation abilities to characters/champions or something. I don’t necessarily think they will do this, I’m guessing at least 1st edition will play it pretty safe, but it could happen.
Given they’ve started ramping up talk about TOW lately I’ve restarted work on my edition comparison so once that’s done I plan to do a larger write-up about what I’d like to see plus some predictions. It’s eating up my already limited painting time but I really want to get it finished before we hear too much haha