| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| 3+ initiative http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=86&t=22898 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Ulrik [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 3+ initiative |
I think 3+ initiative is very underused. Of the official lists, only Orks use it, and they behave more like an 1+ army with restrictions than a true 3+ army. I think it would be good if more armies/formations are 3+, as it would show that the Imperial Guard are, in fact, not the bottom of the barrel. IG armies are professional armies that have left their homeworld and travelled across the stars fighting the Emperor's wars, often for years or decades. I think it would open up the design space if we'd use a wider range of initiative ratings: Elite/veterans 1+, regular troops 2+, irregular/green troops 3+. There are two lists I know of that feature 3+ init, the main one being SpeakerToMachines Insurgency list. The other is my corrupted PDF list which really doesn't count as a list, seeing as it has had all of 1 playtest game. There are also Whiteshields in the Cadian list, are they still 3+? Why 3+ initiative? First it contrasts with 2+ formations like Guardians and Imperial Guard, showing that even if they aren't superhuman like Marines or Aspect Warriors, they are still competent and disciplined soldiers that are able to carry out complex orders. Secondly it shows that a formation that does have 3+ is, well undisciplined. Initiative modifiers (like Orks) lets them be effective in combat, if that is desired, while still showing that they are basically a mob. Or they can have no initiative modifiers if they are supposed to be crap. The final reason, which is more subjective, is that I like 3+ rolls more than 2+ rolls. A single 2+ roll with harsh penalties for failure like an init roll or a Blood Bowl elf doing basically anything is uncomfortable, because it's nearly a sure thing, so you need to try it, but it also fails pretty often - which is just unexpected enough to be really annoying. A 3+ roll, on the other hand, is only twice as likely to succeed as to not succeed, so when it fails it's not really unexpected, you most likely have a plan for it and it doesn't feel nearly as much as bad dice destroying your plans. To me at least. 3+ init does need something in the rules to balance it out. My first instinct is to allow a 3+ army to have more activations than a normal army, allowing for the fact that maybe as much as a third of the formations won't be doing anything actively useful in each turn. High activation count does allow the army to "wait out" other armies, but that might be balanced by the fact that the player has no control over which of his formations will sit on their hands. You're not always in the position where a single move or shooting without moving will do anything. Not to mention that planning for retaining is a very dicey proposition or that a formation with the right amount of BMs will break half the time when you activate it. Initiative bonuses are the other way of countering it, which heavily steers the army towards certain actions (Orks). Which armies should have 3+? Humans armies that are below IG levels of training are the obvious candidates. Chaos cultists and non-critical PDF forces mostly. That is, Cadians or Skitarii PDF, while technically PDF, have the training and combat experience to justify 2+, while PDFs on planets that aren't an important strategic point with constant conflict should be 3+. Of the current lists that means that I think that the Mossinians and the Lost and the Damned cultists and mutants should be 3+. I do recognize that it's a bit late in the day to rejig them to that. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
Quote: There are also Whiteshields in the Cadian list, are they still 3+? They are, and I rate that list highly having playtested it a lot. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
Mossinians as 3+ initiative would have been a great idea at the time, but as they're printed now I'd say they'll have to stay unchanged, and the idea saved for another similar list down the line. |
|
| Author: | Moscovian [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
I like it in the Insurgency list and think it is a great idea for an army, especially a massive or high activation army. I am at a loss of what else would fall into that 3+ category, however, other than humans or human-ish lists. Tyranids and Necrons are straight out. Same with Space Marines and Eldar. Tau seem inappropriate. I don't know what else is left... |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
Conscript armies ala ww2 Russia? |
|
| Author: | Spectrar Ghost [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
Penal Legion might be appropriate. We're essentially looking at poorly trained, poorly lead (or in the case of Orks unleadable), or amateur soldiers here for 3+ Init. CHaos Cultists and Plague Zombies might also make the cut, though they've been present long enough that it may prove impractical to chage at this point. |
|
| Author: | fredmans [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
I had the same idea for a Genstealer Cult army list I did some work on. I think, generally, that 3+ initiative is a great idea for undisciplined armies. My idea was to make a blanket price reduction in line with the increased chance of failed activations and to tweak the Supreme Commander to allow more re-rolls (i.e. one for the Patriarch and one for the Magus). For instance, an IG "rebel" company could be seen as equivalent to an Infantry Company. A worse Initiative value is equivalent to 1/6 "combat efficiency", so my starting point was a 15 % price reduction. Said Infantry Company would thus be 212.5 pts. Lose the Commander or add some ability to the Command stand or add a few units and you can make it 200 or 225. /Fredmans |
|
| Author: | Ulrik [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
I think the work needed to change Mossinians and LatD to 3+ init would be too much at this point, even though I would like to see them at 3+. My point is that I'd like people to keep 3+ init in mind as an option when designing new lists. As for who, Tyranids and Orks are already 3+ under certain circumstances. Eldar live long enough that any Eldar that fights has enough experience to qualify for 2+. Necrons are simply machines, and Marines are Marines. I could definetly see Tau using a few 3+ formations - some alien auxiliaries, a green Fire caste company, stuff like that. So yes, it leaves us with mostly humans, but that's 40k for you, isn't it? The flip side is that I think some formations that are currently 2+ should really have been 1+, like Storm Troopers. Again, I'm not saying Storm Troopers should be changed, but a later new elite unit could well have init 1+. |
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
The cult formations in my Suns of Damnation list are 3+ unless they are within 15cm of their Titan-Gods. |
|
| Author: | Vaaish [ Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
I used 3+ to represent robot formations in the skitarii test lists. |
|
| Author: | madd0ct0r [ Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
demon world could be 3+ the chaos titan cultists would also be 3+ if not near a titan. i also think ulrik should follow up on his traitor pdf list |
|
| Author: | Ulrik [ Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
madd0ct0r wrote: i also think ulrik should follow up on his traitor pdf list I'd love to do that, but although I'll test a lot myself if I go ahead, I won't get it done without any external testing at all. Currently it looks like it's only us two that think it's interesting, so... edit: I'd also like to know more about where the Damnatus Cult is heading to see how big the overlap is. |
|
| Author: | madd0ct0r [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
Which one's the damnatus cult again? |
|
| Author: | Ulrik [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
madd0ct0r wrote: Which one's the damnatus cult again? Woops, brainfart. I meant Stigmatus (the first LatD list) |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3+ initiative |
The thing is, why would someone want to play an army that fails at least 1/3 of its activations? Put a blast marker on them and they fail 50% of the time. To me that doesn't really sound like a fun army to play, unless it has some major bonuses in return. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|