Warhammer-Empire.com

The Empire at War ... The Gamers Guild => Empire 8th Army Book => WHFB The Electors' Forum => Lords Heroes and Special Characters => Topic started by: smithbl on August 10, 2009, 03:40:14 AM

Title: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: smithbl on August 10, 2009, 03:40:14 AM
Gentlemen:

The Empire's armies are made  up of professional, disciplined troops and the GotE should be able to take advantage of this ... Imperial armies should show a high degree of command and control. If you take the GotE his leadership should extend to an 18" range and he should come free with the Rod of Command as a special one use ability "Imperial Discipline." If he was kept at the same price, this would make him an excellent choice.

bls
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Shadoweyed on August 10, 2009, 04:32:54 AM
He's an excellent choice already. It is an interesting idea, but one that would drastically raise his points cost. I mean think of what he is now, nothing Hero hammer-esque, but for roughly 100 points he has a 1+ armor save without taking magic items and leadership 9. Add in that one of your units may take a magic standard and a TVI army build, he is well worth what he is priced at.

-Shadoweyed
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Ganymede on August 10, 2009, 06:39:07 AM
Interesting idea, but I think one of the simplest and most pressing changes for the general of the empire (other than a name change) is to base his stats on the standard template for lord level characters. You know, give him four attacks, a weapon skill of six, and an initiative of six.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Freman Bloodglaive on August 10, 2009, 09:57:01 AM
But you have that in the Templar Grand Master.

It's an interesting feature of the Empire list that there is a fighty commander, a religious commander, and a political commander. In games terms the Elector Count is on par with a Captain in combat terms, but offers the benefit of leadership 9 in a very cheap package.

The specific purpose of the Elector Count is to provide leadership. If you want something more pick another character.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Ganymede on August 10, 2009, 01:20:01 PM
But you have that in the Templar Grand Master.

The specific purpose of the Elector Count is to provide leadership. If you want something more pick another character.

This would be great advice if I needed some pointers in how to build an empire armylist, but we're not talking about tactica here. We're talking about how to change the Empire army for the better.

When designing a game like Warhammer, one solid approach is to determine a baseline level of effectiveness. Once such has been established, one can deviate from this baseline by adding in unique advantages balanced by weaknesses. In the situation of the imperial general, the baseline has been deviated by giving him weaker stats, but no matching advantage has been added to balance out this weakness. To me, that's bad game design.

His low price could hardly be considered an advantage. This character selection is virtually identical in price to the Mercenary General, a largely similar character choice. Likewise is he similar in price to the skaven warlord, another character that plays a very similar role to the imperial general. While their costs remain similar, the non imperial generals mentioned here all have baseline lord stats, while the imperial general's stats are diminished with seemingly no reason.

Not even his ability to bestow a magical banner upon a single unit could be considered an advantage. Almost every other army in the game already gets this power for free. Core and special units across many armybooks naturally have the ability to take a magic banner, and they don't have to take a specific character to do it. If anything, this ability could be considered as yet another army weakness or disadvantage that is without a matching advantage.

If we are going to do a critical review and revision of the empire armybook, I definitely feel that we should be working from an even baseline. We should not try remaking the imperial general based on where he currently is (a character with his stats lowered for little reason) but should instead revise him with an eye to where he should be. At his heart, he is your basic lord level character in an army that is the force in which other armies are contrasted.



That said, I also think the Grand Master is a largely redundant special choice that we don't need (being essentially a standard lord level character with a morale boosting ability), but I'll save that for a future thread.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Fandir Nightshade on August 10, 2009, 03:21:38 PM
I would love the 18 " command radius I would model him that he is standing in front of his campaign table in the back of the army ...perchance a small pavillion and his favorite camp follower on the same large base!

Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: wissenlander on August 11, 2009, 01:25:23 AM
I like where you're going with this, but then it conflicts with special characters.  Karl Franz has an 18" command bubble.  So, there is precedent for this, but it would render a huge advantage for Karl Franz redundant. 

As you have mentioned, Ganymede, the Empire is hurt by not having the magic banner option for free.  The immediate change would be to allow one unit of greatswords to have this as a standard option.

Something that would bring the general (I personally think the name is fine) in line with other characters in the book is the upgrade of one unit of greatswords from special to core.

Also, an idea that I have seen elsewhere, is to upgrade the general into an Elector Count.  They could gain the Runefang 'for free', mainly the sword being attributed to the point increase, and then you could potentially boost the leadership bubble from 12" to 18".  I think that would be reasonable, and would allow a way for someone to actually use the Runefang.  That or actually lower the price of the thing.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Ganymede on August 11, 2009, 01:42:10 AM


(I personally think the name is fine)

But wouldn't it be silly to have a General of the Empire in your army who wasn't actually the general? I just think this guy would be better served called a Marshal or a Commander, or even Admiral.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: wissenlander on August 11, 2009, 02:45:16 AM
I suppose that argument has merit, but the times in which a general wouldn't be a general would be quite slim, I would think.  It's more fitting than the old Elector Count title I find.  People are fussy about names, which can be seen in the current Arch Lector (there are only two you know...).  Make the names as generic as possible so people don't have any worries.  Well, as few as you can.

If it was changed to Marshal of the Empire it would be fine by me.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: smithbl on August 11, 2009, 03:48:40 AM
Gentlemen:

Thank you for the replies. Wissenlander, I also like title "general of the Empire," because it emphasizes the professional character of the Empire's basic armies.

I think Ganymede (sp?) is on to something. Although I do think the changes I suggested to the GotE would help, the game needs to be fixed on a macro level. The two biggest problems are stat inflation and too many special abilities ... the power of the armies and the special abilities has gotten way out of hand. In addition to WFB I also play DBA, which is a model of strategic depth and simplicity of rules. There really needs to be a reduction in the number of special features and a standard baseline just like Ganymede recommended.

bls
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Inarticulate on August 11, 2009, 04:20:08 PM
I don't think his Stats need to be changed, You have to get it into your head that the GoTE (I like this name too - Ganymede.. Admiral? wtf?) is not meant to be the uber lord fighty character in other armies, he is a General and a leader of men,a s the name suggests.

I think the upgrades Wissenlander proposed are excellent and his points cost does not need to be changed.

Inart.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Ganymede on August 11, 2009, 05:34:18 PM
I don't think his Stats need to be changed, You have to get it into your head that the GoTE (I like this name too - Ganymede.. Admiral? wtf?) is not meant to be the uber lord fighty character in other armies, he is a General and a leader of men,a s the name suggests.

I want to stress that neither skaven warlords nor mercenary generals are perceived as "uber lord fighty characters" either, but they at least have regular ole baseline stats for a lord. As I outlined before, the GotE has lowered stats for effectively no reason. His lowered stats are not balanced with extra advantages or a equitable price break.

I am genuinely confused by your point here. Do you honestly believe that a GotE with stats equivalent to a skaven warlord, a brettonian duke, a mercenary general, or even a goblin warboss is somehow equivalent to a "uber lord fighty character?"


That and I like Marshall or Commander; Admiral was just off the cuff.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: der Hurenwiebel on August 11, 2009, 06:02:52 PM
Hell since it is the fantasy version of the Holy Roman Empire call him the FeldObrist, Hoch Adel, or Feldhauptmann.  One way to improve him would be to have a suite of sub category specialists for the GotE.  Like the Elector count, the dean of engineers, Witchfinder general, etc these suites would each come with their own set of magic items seperate from the GotE list as well as their own set of profile improvements and special rules.

This way in theory you could create with a toolkit such as this your own special characters 

 
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Inarticulate on August 11, 2009, 06:07:36 PM
I don't think his Stats need to be changed, You have to get it into your head that the GoTE (I like this name too - Ganymede.. Admiral? wtf?) is not meant to be the uber lord fighty character in other armies, he is a General and a leader of men,a s the name suggests.

I want to stress that neither skaven warlords nor mercenary generals are perceived as "uber lord fighty characters" either, but they at least have regular ole baseline stats for a lord. As I outlined before, the GotE has lowered stats for effectively no reason. His lowered stats are not balanced with extra advantages or a equitable price break.

I am genuinely confused by your point here. Do you honestly believe that a GotE with stats equivalent to a skaven warlord, a brettonian duke, a mercenary general, or even a goblin warboss is somehow equivalent to a "uber lord fighty character?"


That and I like Marshall or Commander; Admiral was just off the cuff.

I'm not entirely sure where you've gotten the idea about Skaven Warlords, Bret Lords and mercenary generals... But, of course you will notice that both these lists are 6th ed. And Dogs obviously 5th.

You have absolutely no justification as to why he should have better stats, your only argument is that hes crap... Hrmm.

And I was amazed by your proposed 'Admiral' name because usually, General is depicted as the leader of Land armies, such as our Empire list (Though of course you could have a Nordland army, but thats by-the-by), and you'd rather have him with a rank that is exclusively used as a sea commander. I don't know, perhaps English isn't your native language and something might have gotten lost in the translation.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Ganymede on August 11, 2009, 06:41:47 PM
I'm not entirely sure where you've gotten the idea about Skaven Warlords, Bret Lords and mercenary generals... But, of course you will notice that both these lists are 6th ed. And Dogs obviously 5th.

I'm not entirely sure that you even have a point here. I've reread this exerpt a couple of times and I still can't figure out what you are alluding to.

Quote
You have absolutely no justification as to why he should have better stats, your only argument is that hes crap... Hrmm.

Are you sure that's my argument, because I never actually said that.

Secondly, and ignoring any sort of veracity (or lack of) in this exerpt, isn't this inherently contradictory? You claim I have no justification and yet list a justification right after. That's kooky.

Quote
And I was amazed by your proposed 'Admiral' name because usually, General is depicted as the leader of Land armies, such as our Empire list (Though of course you could have a Nordland army, but thats by-the-by), and you'd rather have him with a rank that is exclusively used as a sea commander. I don't know, perhaps English isn't your native language and something might have gotten lost in the translation.

In some ways, it is a pleasant surprise to be able to answer a post with a direct quote from a previous post. In other ways, I'm disappointed that the other posters didn't read the original quoted post in the first place.

Anyways, here is my response to the above.... pay attention this time.


Quote from: Ganymede
That and I like Marshall or Commander; Admiral was just off the cuff.

Lastly, I was kind of hoping that you'd answer a question that I posed from my last post, a question you glossed over. I'll present it again for your convenience.

Do you honestly believe that a GotE with stats equivalent to a skaven warlord, a brettonian duke, a mercenary general, or even a goblin warboss is somehow equivalent to a "uber lord fighty character?"
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Shadoweyed on August 12, 2009, 04:14:08 AM
I'm not entirely sure where you've gotten the idea about Skaven Warlords, Bret Lords and mercenary generals... But, of course you will notice that both these lists are 6th ed. And Dogs obviously 5th.

I'm not entirely sure that you even have a point here. I've reread this exerpt a couple of times and I still can't figure out what you are alluding to.


The point there is that the different additions hold different rules making stats scale differently. Playing in 5th addition, he may easily fall prey to the Mercenary General, but in 7th that may not be the case. The rules/ special rules dictate the scale and effect the stats have.

On the topic point, the General of the Empire is not a fighty lord. He is a survivor. You kit him so he survives and his men fight on.

-Shadoweyed
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Fandir Nightshade on August 12, 2009, 11:31:14 AM
Another idea would be to make the General the only lord choice and give him titles that tweak him this way or another

Generl usual profile with rules right now

+80 points Elector count, same profile but a runefang and leader of men granting him 18 " command range

+95 points Arch Lector profile as AL right now and AL right now

+60 points Templar Grandmaster rules as right now

+40 points master engineer with funky rules from this great forums thread

+100 points Mage lord

etc...
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Spiney on August 12, 2009, 01:16:41 PM

If we are going to do a critical review and revision of the empire armybook, I definitely feel that we should be working from an even baseline. We should not try remaking the imperial general based on where he currently is (a character with his stats lowered for little reason) but should instead revise him with an eye to where he should be. At his heart, he is your basic lord level character in an army that is the force in which other armies are contrasted.



That said, I also think the Grand Master is a largely redundant special choice that we don't need (being essentially a standard lord level character with a morale boosting ability), but I'll save that for a future thread.

I think the lowering of an Imperial general's stats is readily justifiable. Unlike most other races the Empire does not appoint its generals on the basis of their prowess in single combat. Whereas the leader of a skaven horde or an Orc Waaagh! will be the biggest strongest beast around a man is elevated to his position as commander of an imperial army for a combination of his parentage and his ability to command troops effectively, more as a tactician than a one on one fighter.

I think the profile is fairly costed as well, if you want a "proper" Lord profile then the Grandmaster profile is the one for you, with a correspondingly higher pts cost (some 65pts higher).

However it has left the General looking somewhat... nondescript. The extra banner is nice, but as you correctly pointed out Greatswords, at least should have access to one anyway to make the list comparable to other armies.

The 18" leadership extension is a good idea, how about something like an additional +1CR for any combat involving him, or an additional +1" movement for units within a certain distance representing their drilling and discipline.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Inarticulate on August 12, 2009, 04:20:45 PM
I'm not entirely sure where you've gotten the idea about Skaven Warlords, Bret Lords and mercenary generals... But, of course you will notice that both these lists are 6th ed. And Dogs obviously 5th.

I'm not entirely sure that you even have a point here. I've reread this exerpt a couple of times and I still can't figure out what you are alluding to.


The point there is that the different additions hold different rules making stats scale differently. Playing in 5th addition, he may easily fall prey to the Mercenary General, but in 7th that may not be the case. The rules/ special rules dictate the scale and effect the stats have.

On the topic point, the General of the Empire is not a fighty lord. He is a survivor. You kit him so he survives and his men fight on.

-Shadoweyed

Thats what i was getting at, Ganymede. I'm not sure I put it in a way you could understand.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Ganymede on August 12, 2009, 07:55:09 PM
I think the lowering of an Imperial general's stats is readily justifiable. Unlike most other races the Empire does not appoint its generals on the basis of their prowess in single combat. Whereas the leader of a skaven horde or an Orc Waaagh! will be the biggest strongest beast around a man is elevated to his position as commander of an imperial army for a combination of his parentage and his ability to command troops effectively, more as a tactician than a one on one fighter.

The problem here is that you aren't exactly justifying the lowered stats of an imperial general. You are merely rationalizing them. Both of us can rationalize these stats until we are blue in the face, but in the end it is utterly meaningless.

[/quote]I think the profile is fairly costed as well, if you want a "proper" Lord profile then the Grandmaster profile is the one for you, with a correspondingly higher pts cost (some 65pts higher).[/quote]

For one, I don't think this attitude is especially helpful in a forum dedicated to revision the empire rulebook. This type of thinking straightjackets us into the old armybook, when the entire point of revision is to make something new.

Secondly, when similarly equipped, the grandmaster is only 23 points more than the general. It is difficult to imagine that entire 23 points is gobbled up by the stat increase when the morale boosting ability is probably work many points in its own right.

The fact remains that the GotE is worse than similar characters such as the mercenary general, but still costs a similar amount. There is absolutely no reason for this to be the case. It is merely bad balancing on GW's part.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Inarticulate on August 12, 2009, 09:17:55 PM
The Merc. general is a slightly better fighter, but has no choice of magic equipment apart from the common ones and has worse choices for mundane equipment.

Tbh you shouldn't even compare the GoTE to the Merc, they're from very different editions and I'm not sure why you brought it up.

Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Ganymede on August 12, 2009, 10:54:49 PM
The Merc. general is a slightly better fighter, but has no choice of magic equipment apart from the common ones and has worse choices for mundane equipment.

This is just more rationalization.

Quote
Tbh you shouldn't even compare the GoTE to the Merc, they're from very different editions and I'm not sure why you brought it up.

No, they're not from very different editions. In fact, they are from remarkably similar editions. Hell, the editions are so similar that the elector count of 6th edition and the GotE of 7th edition are identical.

The bottom line here is that there are few arguments that even justify the current stat line for the GotE. Despite the common refrain in this thread of "They are leaders, not fighters," there is nothing in the Commanders of the Empire entry that would indicate a lack of fighting prowess. In fact, the entry goes as far to state that these leaders have undergone extensive martial training from an early age. There is no doubt that the Generals of the Empire are capable warriors.

Secondly, the canard that boosting the statline of the GotE to baseline levels would make them "uber killy" is completely false. Hell, no one has ever confused the Grand Master as being a super killy character on par with vampires, chaos lords, and ogres, and no one would do the same with a GotE with similar stats. This is a fear that is completely unfounded.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: wissenlander on August 13, 2009, 10:33:28 AM
I suppose its all in how one perceives the objective of each character.  The fighting character is the GM.  To upgrade the General, in those terms, would then make the GM redundant.  And I think the stats as they are represent a lifetime of training.  They don't beat out captains by a lot, but are well above standard infantry.  Giving them another attack, I think, would be alright, but I wouldn't feel comfortable doing anything else on the stat line.

I really think the best way to enhance the general, and to make him a better option, is to help him in regards to leading the army.  He's unique in that respect because almost every other character in the game has some other niche to fill on top of leadership.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Ganymede on August 13, 2009, 03:57:42 PM
I think the grand master is already redundant in a certain extent. Bizarrely enough, it is the grand master who is better at leading troops than the GotE. It is the grand master who has a special ability that boosts his unit's morale.

I definitely agree that the GotE should be given an ability that allows him to more effectively lead his troops, but such upgrades to him would (almost out of necessity) render the grand master completely unneeded. I think the best way to handle the situation would be to give the GotE a standard statline for a lord, a morale boosting ability, and allow him to carry out his duties effectively either on foot or on horseback. That way, the player is free to use his GotE to represent a dashing mercenary commander, an imperial marshal, or a grand master.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Spiney on August 13, 2009, 10:58:40 PM
I think the grand master is already redundant in a certain extent. Bizarrely enough, it is the grand master who is better at leading troops than the GotE. It is the grand master who has a special ability that boosts his unit's morale.


That is only because you believe, for whatever reason that the GoTE should have the TGM's profile. Generals of the Empire are pampered elector counts and snotty nosed nobility, there is no possible grounds for them to have the same stats as the Grandmaster of a Knightly Order or a Bretonnian Lord.

And for goodness sake stop comparing the GotE to the ruddy mercenary general, DoW isn't even a legal choice in official tournements because GW has dumped the army list and withdrawn the model range so any comparison is totally meaningless. Perhaps you would like to compare the GotE to a Chaos dwarf Lord next?

And the point of your scathing criticism of "rationalisation" totally escapes me, rationalisation is better than being irrational in this case.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: cisse on August 17, 2009, 10:49:02 AM
He's an excellent choice already.
Well, he's not. Compared to the other Empire lords, he doesn't add anything really useful to the army except LD (and the others do that too). Okay he's cheaper, but that doesn't cut it in this case. We won't even start to compare him to other armies' lords...

He doesn't need a more powerful statline or something like that, just some characterful rules to make him that little more useful. A slightly extended LD range perhaps, or the ability to reroll panic tests when in range.

Also, they could make some "disciplines" that he could take, like vampire powers and bretonnian virtues. They'd help out the army as a whole though, not the general himself. Perhaps the ability to relocate a single unit after deployment, or (again) extended LD range, or... You get the drift. Given a correct point cost, these "disciplines" could really make the ordinary general more useful.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Derek Contyre on August 17, 2009, 11:43:41 AM
About this talk of comparing to the merc general and other human represented hordes(skaven is in this category as they have similiar statlines to humans, bretts are human enough said) What Ganymede is trying to say is that other human lords have better fighting abilities then our empire general and are more cost effective.
Hell a skaven lord can give everyone within 12 of him ld10! while we have to subsist on ld 9. I find that a little sucky.

Maybe have our general confer a ld bonus to the whole army. instead of 18 range make every unit have ld 9 as long as the general is on the field or has a unique ability or such. Like the brettonian virtue's. Or if a GoTE is your leader then all state troops get his leadership? That would be better as it justifies taking heaps of core troops for empire.

Everyone just remember that whatever GW come up with they will always try to make the next army relevant to sales. Like they did with the new GS. ten dudes? $70. Rip . . . IMHO its a rip anyway. ten plastic dudes. . . 70 dollars is too much. I dont care how much extra components they come with.

They will always try to balance the army with what will sell more. Not how effective our excellent imperials are at winning or not.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: cisse on August 18, 2009, 08:51:46 AM
Hell a skaven lord can give everyone within 12 of him ld10! while we have to subsist on ld 9. I find that a little sucky.
Don't even get me started on the fact that skaven, supposedly born cowards, have higher LD than our -trained- soldiers. I could rant a full page on that subject.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Chr1s-Cross on August 18, 2009, 02:43:32 PM
I definitely agree on the "disipline" part - I think Ld 7 means regular Empire troops literally have just about half a chance of passing leadership tests! And even when playing with Karl Franz, a lot of my soldiers have fled and caused whole chains of panic to my other units while KF is on the other side of the battlefield.

I really wish empire troops at least had Ld 8 - one time I fled with pistoliers who I had deliberately placed in charge range of the enemy, only to have the rest of my army follow suit after the pistoliers ran through one unit, so I really think the Ld 7 should be changed.

Okay, rant over...
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Derek Contyre on August 19, 2009, 07:36:48 AM
I vote if you take a GoTE then everything in your army becomes base LD 9.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: commandant on October 01, 2009, 11:24:41 PM
I have a crazy idea.   Make the GOTE give 3d6-2 leadership over a range of 5d6-2 inches.   This means that your GOTE can offer anything from 1-16 leadership with the average being about nine I think over a range of everything from 3 - 30 inches.   I think this would represent the fact that some generals are pampered idiots, some are born commanders and some are promoted from the ranks for grabbing some noble's son's arse and saving it and have no idea how to lead men.   Some more fixed benefit would be needed of course.

Oh and how about making the TGM and the Arch Lector leadership 8
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Derek Contyre on October 02, 2009, 01:25:20 PM
No to the templar and arch lector being leadership 8.

TGM are supposed to be battle hardened leaders(although in the fluff it says that about GoTE  :?) and arch lectors are more inspiring then a GoTE depending on who you ask.  Dont make other choices less effective to make our beloved general more viable
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Inarticulate on October 02, 2009, 03:29:54 PM
I agree with Derek. Ld 9 for the entire army while he's alive and on the table.

Don't do anything with his stats though, he's not a battle-hardened warrior, just an Imperial Noble, born to privelage, not dedicated to fighting like Bretonnians and not spent his life warring for a living like the Merc General
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Perius on October 02, 2009, 05:27:45 PM
Ganymede - Wouldn't it be more foward thinking to decide the stats and abilties of the General by his background, rather than by comparing him to 6th edition warrior leaders from other armies?
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: der Hurenwiebel on October 02, 2009, 06:33:24 PM
Commandant: great idea for a campaign I don't think it will fly in an army book though.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Derek Contyre on October 02, 2009, 11:01:36 PM
In the new fluff regarding GoTE they can have risen through the ranks as a soldier in the halberdiers to get to that position.

So you could essentially have a general who has dedicated his life to war.

But then they are said to wield their armies as effortlessly as a blade.

That line calls for special rules
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: T0m on October 03, 2009, 04:13:21 PM
Well, 'The General' is a very broad term so why not have, say, provincial special rules options or just different kinds of generals? The Noble (not necessarily an Elector Count as base, option to use a Runefang obviously makes a Noble an EC), The Master Strategist (some deployment or movement special rules, not a generic fighter-lord so no stat-increase), and The Templar Grand Master (stat-increase and other Knightly whatnot, THE fighter general). So we have a noble morale-booster, the masterful strategist and tactician, and finally the fighter.

Imperial edit: The Grand Master could also be dubbed 'The Knight' or such, or even 'The Warrior'. This way you could make your own heroic fighters without making them Grand Masters.

Another Imperial editation of intellectual excellence: the province where the General hails from could affect army composition, not the General himself. By having both of these options we'd be on par with Wood Elven Kindreds, Chaos god marks and whatnot, Vampire Bloodlines (what ever they're called nowadays), Bretonnian Virtues, etc. Fluff-wise it's true the Empire boasts colourful armies led by colourful and able individuals and that the provinces and their people vary from area to area. From the snobbish noble of Reikland to the master gunner of Nuln and the Ulric-sworn hammer hero of Middenheim... Might just make house rules for these. :happy:
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: Chr1s-Cross on October 07, 2009, 03:59:33 PM
Maybe if you choose a general of the empire to lead your army, you get to choose a special strategy before battle (i.e. like building a trench for handgunners to shoot out of, or forcing the enemy to deploy all of his units before yours, etc), for added points cost, depending on how good the strategy is. I think that would be good, because it wouldn't beef him up, or add to his points cost, just give you a tactical advantage even though it takes up points!

I also think it would suit an empire general too, because the empire seems to have mainly average troops, and is supposed to rely on ingenious weapons and tactics to win the day. I guess Karl Franz could be allowed to use a rule like that as well, seeing as he is an empire general, only better.
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: pelcu on May 02, 2010, 07:16:00 PM
I think that Generals should give special ability like free Turn and Hold as reaction for opponents charge or immune to panic for his unit.
   Empire has professional soldiers not peasants (like Bretonians) General or Capitan as Unit commander should give something really useful..
Title: Re: General of the Empire and Discipline
Post by: DanteValentine on May 18, 2010, 03:21:55 PM
I think what people are forgetting here is that while the Empire wins through well placed tactics and clever solution, their leadership is meant to represent an average human.

Skaven (well, lets not talk about that utterly crazy piece of rule writing!)

Elves, alive for hundreds of years and achieving tactical superioirty to most races do and SHOULD have a LD of 10

Dwarves, more willing to die than retreat most of the time have a naturally high leadership.

If GW were to start giving everyone high leaderships or making rules so that General's of the Empire etc make all troops have leadership of 9 while on the table, it would undermine armies whose troops should have high leadership to represent increased levels of discipline, training or pure suicidal bravery.

Bear in mind as well, that Armies like Brettonia only have access to LD 9 Generals (including the King!). I dont see why Empire should really be any different?

Again, just my opinion but i think things have got to be viewed in a wider context.

Regards

D