I've been reviewing the blood rage rule and I'm still not happy with it - as others aren't either. I've been playing with a couple of ideas on replacing the current idea. They are somewhat reduced in wordiness and a little more simple, however I'd like some feedback on whether they would actually be too much.

#1
Any Berserker formation in a World Eaters army may add +1 to combat resolution during a close combat Engage action.

OR

#2
Any Berserker formation in a World Eaters army ignores the presence of BMs for combat resolution.


Notes: these ideas would be a simple addition to the current assault resolution table. The aim is to make them a little more deadly in CC through the resolution system rather than a long-winded rule that may or may not be mindlessly Khorne-like.

I'd really like some feedback on the pros and cons of such a change.

Cheers all!

Here ya go Hena...


Any formation in a World Eaters army (excluding
Chaos Navy or spacecraft) that fails its Action Test (see
1.6.2 of the Epic: Armageddon rulebook) must perform
an Engage action, rather than the usual Hold action. If
any unit in the formation cannot end that engage move
within 15cms of any enemy formations, then the
formation must make one move at maximum speed
towards the nearest enemy formation. The formation still
receives a Blast Marker for failing its action test as
normal, applied before any Assault takes place, and the
formation must keep unit coherency as it moves.

This just seems very wordy and a few people questioned its application etc. and whether Khorne followers should really be forced into something they don't want. So I thought I'd try to look at a simpler option for a "special rule' for beserkers and make them CC beasties.

With no zerker formations larger than 8 strong and only applying to the WE marine infantry would it be a massive hurdle? I'm trying to simulate the WE's lack of care about suppression in an assault (ignore BMs) OR their love for getting among the enemy up close and cutting them to ribbons etc (+1 resolution).

Hey dobbsy

I have been trying to collate something as well but I have drawn a blank. So I am going over what it is to be Khorne and go from there myself.

As for the ideas you placed forward, I think that they may be too good. Their CC factor is already one of the best in the game, and their Feerless rule just makes your additions quite menacing IMO.

Are you talking about their blood rage in that they go after the enemy on the roll of a 1 for initiative? If so, personally I like it, even if it does mess with the Grand Tournament objectives.

I know it may annoy people that they cannot rely on the army to hold a ground, however that was evident in the Heresy novels where the World Eaters did not do what was expected and Horus looked on while Angron led his warriors in a slaughter (Istvaan IV ??). In this respect the current ruling for this is justified.

If people want an army that they can rely on to stick to objectives, I do not think that taking the Post Heresy World Eater list (a warband force after Kharn's involvement who lose themselves in the glory of battle) is the list that they should be taking. They do one thing well, and relying on them to sit on a landing pad while combat goes on around them is not what that is I'm afraid.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

I really like the current version actually, it's totally khorne!

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

hmmm... good points to you both.

I would still prefer something less complicated though and try to meet a bit of flavour.

Hmm here's another little idea that just popped up for flavour. just an idea lads so I need feedback  

Blood rage
If a World Eater Berserkers formation loses an engagement they will always elect to abandon their transports in favour of getting to grips with the enemy in hand to hand combat rather than run away. Therefore, the WE player must elect to destroy his transports rather than force his berserkers to withdraw (refer to 2.1.3 MRB regarding the Fearless rule).

While they get the benefits of the fearless rule they also get penalty of the blood rage. if they lose an engagement - which isn't unlikely - they lose their transports and become foot infantry.  Remember this only effects the marine infantry units nothing else.

Could this work? I see it as reasonably fair to both sides.

Obviously it will need to be tested and I think vassal might be a good option if anyone would like to trial it with me???

I may also tone down the 2+ CC for 3+ - they're not eldar banshees they're still only psychologically suped-up marines so I think I'd prefer to boost their abilities with resolution rules instead - if at all...

Wouldn't this cause odd situation with both 2+ and 3+ CC berserkers around?

_________________
www.tneva.net

Don't like the transport idea, it's too bizarre. It may sound ok on paper, but ingame:

"So I lose by 1. All my transports die."
"Huh?"

CC2+ is fine, it represents different things to the Banshee 2+. Banshee 2+ represents their high skill and their power swords, whereas Berzerker 2+ mostly represents the sheer frenzy of their attacks. They're certainly better in CC than assault marines.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

As a general rule, I dislike flat out assault resolution bonuses for CC troops, like BM or outnumbering or Inspiring. Those don't work just for encouraging CC, but also for clipping assaults.  If the bonuses are good enough, it actually becomes a disincentive to go to CC.  If you can win by bonuses and maintain your troops, that's generally superior to winning by a larger margin and losing more troops (which would happen if you charged to CC instead of clipping).  Carefully engaging from a distance is the opposite of the intended berzerker close combat fury.

A bonus to Engage activations (like the recent change to the Death Company) and the Hold-becomes-Engage are both good options in my book.

Encouragement to Engage and large difference between the CC and FF values will tend to mean that CC is going to be preferred.  The increase in damage from CC over FF should be sufficient to overcome the additional exposure.  The formation will need the extra CC kills to win because they cannot rely on innate assault mods.

_________________
Neal

But you would break in the process, so the application is pretty limited for a formation that, unlike tyranids, doesn't get a bonus to rally.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

There were other Nid initiative and rally issues at the same time, so I'm not sure it's a good comparison.

Assuming I am understanding the intent correctly, for this to be abused, you'd need to...

1) fail activation (admittedly, a player can sort of tank on purpose)
2) have an assault target formation within 30cm so you can have a legitimate assault
3) have a position you wanted to get to that is within 30cm of the assault position (possibly up to 60cm if the formation still had Rhinos and didn't lose them in the assault)
4) want to get to the new position bad enough to risk casualties from the assault and the possibility of not rallying
5) lose the assault to get the Withdrawal move

Why would you want to do that?  You can't capture or contest immediately after a rally, so the only possible strategic uses are stopping TSNP, assuming you rally, or physically blocking the path to an objective, which works whether you rally or not.

I agree this could happen and be wonky, but it doesn't seem like it would be very common.  Equally important, it seems like it would be something of a consolation prize.  It doesn't let you do anything you couldn't have done with a successful check, without having to become broken in the process.

Are the Rhinos Fearless?  If not, then I think in practical terms you can assume that the Rhinos are forfeit and the Withdrawal is limited to 30cm.

_________________
Neal