Warhammer-Empire.com
The Empire at War ... The Gamers Guild => WHFB The Electors' Forum => Topic started by: Twiggle on December 13, 2008, 01:07:32 AM
-
So I was playing against some friends the Other day ( 2000 pts game, they had orcs and wood elves at 1000 each) and I had 2 rocket batteries and a mortar ( never play them so ... Why not I thought). To my great satisfaction, they deployed all of there troops on one side and they tried the "refused flank tactic". But, the orc player deployed a line of 20 goblin archers in front of his 2 regiments with general and great banner, his chariot and trolls. He claimed that by doing so, I couldn't try to aim his orcs, only the goblins. Then we entered a long debate...
First off, I told him that in the case of a cannon, yes he'd be right. But even at that, orcs are 6f 5 ,if not , more, and goblins maybe 4 feet if I'm REALLY generous. They may block line of sight for archers or musketeers ( in the warhammer world apparently XD) but a mortar ...and even the rockets? They have an arc trajectory. The guy aiming knows there's a big group of orcs behind the goblins, and being an artillery crewman, he wants to aim towards the middle of his enemies forces, right?
I didn't want to metagame, but hell NOBODY( not even in warhammer) is dumb enough to not guess , in this case, that an orc army is behind a thiner-then-paper line of goblin archers ( that, by the way, didn't have any fanatics XD and it took him 5 rounds just to get to base contact because of them XD)
I pounded him the whole way ( which hasn't as fruitful as I thought it would be, thanks to the amazing accuracy of the rockets)
-
Well... I hate to break it too you... but... he's right. Unless you are on a hill. In which case he's wrong.
-
So I was supposed to try and aim for his goblins... hoping that they would hit orcs? ... I guess your right. But it's the kind of thing that is so illogical that on the flow of the moment my mind refuses to accept.
v.8 correction I hope.
-
By the rules he's right. Of course, these aren't exactly precision weapons. Aim a little closer than you would normally. I mean, the warmachine crews aren't stupid, they can see the orcs behind the gobbos, they just can't aim at them.
-
This topic makes my ears twitch! In my humble opinion the above ruling is crap.
WHAB 1E, P. 10, 'Be Prepared to Improvise', Jervis Johnson
"We cant possibly give rules to cover every circumstance. Nor would we want to try. Players should feel free to invent and improvise..."
Guess weapons are exactly that, a guess. A guess is not targeted, it only has a vector. Therefore he can not dictate at what you aim. In these situations we have used house rules.
House Rule Solutions (That I have used)
Mortars- Roll 2 scatter die, your oponent may choose the result.
(Prefered solution, causes mortars to be in-acurate but a good rule for bombing fortifications and giving covering troops a purpose.)
Cannnons- Roll the second misfire die twice, your oponent may choose the result.
(Again a prefered solution, allows you to target the cannon strike but prevents it from being very deadly when shielding troops prevent line of sight.)
-
You can't target units you can't see, plain and simple. There might not be a unit behind those gobbos afterall, or the unit could be a long way behind, or close to it, or behind to the left, behind to the right... The fact is if your actively targeting the unseen unit (centering the aim on the orcs, and guessing to hit them) then your pushing the rules to far.
(imho) :closed-eyes:
:biggriin:
-
Fraid everyone is right: you do have to target units you have a LOS to, but considering (at least in my experience) the tendencies for Helstorms to be wildly inaccurate, you're better off targeting units you can trace a LOS to in the general vicinity of the area-not the unit-you wish to hit. Consider the following: you have two units of Orcs side by side screened by a line of goblin archers-you must target the Goblins but your rocket barrages are going to hit somewhere in that general vicinity based on the vagaries of the artillery dice. You are just as likely to hit the Orc units (or blow the hell out of some innocent hedges!) as the goblin unit so in practice this isn't really an issue. :-)
I don't use mortars, only Helstorms. I'm sure mortars aren't quite as random but Helstorms make up for their randomness with their template and their strength. Remember: target areas, not units, and you'll be a happier camper!
-
yea, helstorms are fun... you just point them at some orcs, skaven or annother horde army and let them fly... they won't hit what your aiming for, but they'll hit something mortars, however, seem to be pretty unforgiving, from my (rather limeted) experince
-
CAPTSCOTT! You live!!
:::cheers:::
Back the question. Unless you are a large target, you cannot be shot at over interveneing troops unless the shooter is on a hil. Don't be a dick and overguess. Thats for sally players who are too cowardly to smash what they can see and want to smash what they cannot.
Phil
-
Maybe the confusion is because back in the day, didn't mortars used to not require line of sight in the same way as cannons?
It's a vague and confused recollection, but there is something there on the edge of my memory...
-
I find it much easier to hit things with rocket launchers than mortars, because I always guess short.
Maybe the confusion is because back in the day, didn't mortars used to not require line of sight in the same way as cannons?
No. They were once inexplicably overpriced stone throwers though (4th edition).
Plus, cannons do need line of sight. :icon_smile:
-
Well i would have to say your friend is technically right if you were not on the high ground you can't shoot his troops but there is a way around every rule....say you'll shoot the goblins and add on inches so you can pound his orcs :biggriin: they can't make your guess for you so wahla! you win
-
Sorry, I phrased the sentence wrong. I know cannons need line of sight :-P.
I just remember seeing some overcomplicated tactical article in White Dwarf... man, if only I knew where it was...
-
Its not like a goblin screen is hard to panic anyway. Even if its on the generals LD its not hard to do enough casualties in one round of decent shooting to make the screen ineffective.
-
that true blast them away and wow..nothing left or they lost so much they panic hopefully lose LD test and flee into the orcs dieing and causing panic
-
Goblins dont cause panic in orcs.
-
oh lol sorry i haven't played orcs in years :icon_frown:
-
If he places his orcs very close to the goblins shoot on the goblins and forget some of the extra inches for the jumping cannonball, so that the cannonball hits on the gobbos and jumps into the orcs.
Or charge the goblins with something small an weak (huntsmen!) and use his screen as a big barricade for his big units.
sincerely
Tim
-
To all of you that are suggesting purposefully overguessing:
Die.
Phil
-
To all of you that are suggesting purposefully overguessing:
Die.
Phil
Indeed.
Just dont do it. It is cheating.
-
I think that as long as you intend to hit bouth units, there is no problem with it. I guess thats my twisted sense of morality ar work.
-
Meh, my group said that they could aim rocks at my BsB behind my archer screen specifically as he is mounted waving a big flag. They lost all their rights to generous guesses especially if I have a trooper who can report in the whereabouts of juicy targets. Its rare my mortar doesn't have a target to go with already when I deploy it.
-
You can't hit both units. You can only hit the front one. IF you scatter into the other, thats another story.
Phil
-
... with a cannon I mean. I thought you were addressing this post...
If he places his orcs very close to the goblins shoot on the goblins and forget some of the extra inches for the jumping cannonball, so that the cannonball hits on the gobbos and jumps into the orcs.
-
To all of you that are suggesting purposefully overguessing:
Die.
Phil
That rather extreme. All overguessing is, is another reason all guess weapons should be removed from the game. If you really want to force someone to follow the targeting rules, ditch the ability to overguess. Since guess ranges weapons exist in the game, and overguessing is an obvious way to use the rules, I'd think there shouldn't be much problem with it.
If one unit is screening another unit 3" back, how would you ever prove that someone was overguessing anyway?
-
I would know.
And you heart would know.
Your heart.
:icon_evil:
Phil
-
To all of you that are suggesting purposefully overguessing:
Die.
Phil
Despite its intended audience... That’s an awful statement and does not bellong on this forum.
-
To all of you that are suggesting purposefully overguessing:
Die.
Phil
That rather extreme. All overguessing is, is another reason all guess weapons should be removed from the game. If you really want to force someone to follow the targeting rules, ditch the ability to overguess. Since guess ranges weapons exist in the game, and overguessing is an obvious way to use the rules, I'd think there shouldn't be much problem with it.
If one unit is screening another unit 3" back, how would you ever prove that someone was overguessing anyway?
I totally disagree with all the naysayers about overguessing with artillery weapons. I've experienced it on both sides and I just plain do not see the argument against it. Ruleswise it is perfectly legal I think it is a very viable tactic. Fluffwise it is historically accurate for cannonballs to target commanders and to be selective with artillery fire.
-
ok phil that was very low and immature....to say just go die isn't right for one but seriously if he wants to play cheap and use goblins which are like 1 point (exagerration) and shield better guys thats as cheap to me as overguessing 3-5 inches....and guessing weapons make fantasy fantasy.....withoutt guess weapons it's like 40k because in fantasy medieval times their weapons aren't accurate or reliable so there has to be guessing and everyone does something cheap so because you don't like the prospect of over guessing a few inches maybe you should re-read your post and think about what you just said
-
Whoah Tigers! I'm sure Phil was joking! :-)
-
Despite its intended audience... That’s an awful statement and does not bellong on this forum.
Nor lack of humor...
I agree with PhillyT about the overguessing. I am not ready to go to jail yet to the die part will have to be his solely.
:engel:
-
I think part of the problem is that the thing Philly seemed to be responding to was using a cannonball to hit both the front unit and the unit behind which is not only fair, it is what they are meant for!
But I'm thinking that what he was actually talking about was the over-guessing with the weapon (mortar or cannon - though with the bounce factor on cannon it is harder to tell when someone is purposefully doing it unless they are really obvious) so that you don't even hit the first unit. Now that's not so cool.
And I am sure he means that he hopes your army dies in the WH world, not you personally :wink:.
-
Actually back in the day, overguessing was explained as a perfectly legitimate way of using stone throwers. This is going back a bit, but it's explained in Chronicles of War p15 by Rick Priestly. There's diagrams and everything. Some players might have hangovers from that, I know that I thought it was still legal because I hadn't read the warmachine rules in subsequent editions. The basic idea was that you could see the enemy army advancing and you were choosing to target the back of his line despite not strictly being able to see what was there.
These days I'm pretty sure you can't do it, though I still haven't bothered reading the new rules. It's a bit shit when it's midget goblins supposedly blocking LOS by standing in front of massive hulking orcs but that guy is right, despite probably being a bit of a dickhead.
Don't do it. Though personally I think it should be allowed.
-
You kids need thicker skin.
I don;t have an issue with cannons, they are made toi bounce through units.
I was talking about mortars and other arcing shot items. Back in the day, if a crew member could see something, then it could be shot at. Not, warmachines need line of sight. If you cannot draw line of sight to a target, you cannot shoot it. Plan and simple. So no Archaon, it is not perfectly legal to fire at units the warmachine cannot see.
Phil
-
I'm fine with "slight overguessing", say maximum 3 inches...
Overguessing by say 10 inch should deserve capital punishment.
-
Well, in fairness, nobody would be able to know when someone has over guessed by anything less than 6" unless they were a guessing god, like myself. ;)
But the cases were someone is overguessing are generally fairly obvious to the trained eye, like when they are lining up their shot in a way not to maximize their hits on the target unit but rather to line with a unit behind it...
Phil
-
The whining about overguessing sounds extremely odd to me. People are allowed to use dicey and "unrealistic" (always a tricky word in fantasy gaming) meat shield tactics (no way in hell a unit of Night Goblins completely obscure a unit of Black Orcs behind, but according to the rules, they do) but people are not allowed to use a perfectly, rules-wise, legal tactic to hit said Black Orcs because it is "cheating"?
-
Again, I don't know where this mispreception that it is legal came from but you MUST be able to draw line of sight from the shooting object, either a unit or the barrel of the warmachine, to the target you are shooting at. If line of sight cannot be drawn, the target is not legal. Simple as that.
As for night goblins blocking black orcs, the idea is that as they move accross the field, they are kicking up dust, their spears are in the way, and they block enough line of sight that no clear shots can be taken at the orcs who are behind them. What would make sense to you, you need to be exactly the same height as the shielded unit to block line of sight?
Phil
-
To all of you that are suggesting purposefully overguessing:
Die.
Phil
The only time I did that I was playing with my O&G, and my (proxied) Doom Diver slew my Giant, who was in combat with a bunch of Tzeentch Horrors. That day I learned that the dice gods immediately punish cheating.
-
Indeed, you MUST see what you shoot at. Period. This is WHFB, not 40K. In 40K, that is more close to modern warfare, the concept of indirect fire exist. However, indirect fire was not a concept back in time and the Warhammer fantasy rules reflect that!
As for screening your harder troops with lighter or expendable ones, THAT has been done since the dawn of time almost. It is standard tactics. And for greenskins it is a fluff tactic.
Also, it is called attacking in waves, another well-known tactic.
It is also about sense. 6th ed. had restrictions on what you could fire at based on the proximity to the target, just like 4th ed 40K. Now, it has been lifted there too, replaced with a models eye view rule of shooting, meaning there is few places where you can hide, but the cover saves have gone up in accordance.
Warhammer is still more abstract. And that is bloody good. Accept that. You CANT see what is beyond the front units clearly. Dust, spearpoints, tunnelvision etc works against that. You must either be on a hill OR the units behind better be a big ugly dragon or similar that you simply cannot avoid to see.
And who knows, those orcsies my be hunkering down abit, using the gobbos as a way of getting at your cowardly warmachines. And gobbos are meant to be used like that.
-
Like I said, it used to be legal, which is a good reason why some people will think it still is. There is no argument - it was legal, plain and simple. Now it's not. I prefer the old way but as the game has rules, preferences don't matter and the simple answer is no.
-
So it is illegal to fire at a target and purposefully overguess it, hitting something behind it instead?
Where does that come from in the rules? "Trying to guess the range as accurately as possible"?
-
YES!
That and the fact you CANNOT fire on something you cannot see.
-
Its right in the main warmachine rules. A warmachine must be able to draw line of sight from the machine to the target.
Phil
-
My goodness ... I wish I had problems like this .........
-
Wahey, so I was right. It did used to be legal and they did write an article about it. :biggriin:
It's always nice when you find your brain isn't totally melted. :happy:
-
Its right in the main warmachine rules. A warmachine must be able to draw line of sight from the machine to the target.
Phil
But the target is the model in front, which you have LOS to....you're just overguessing. That would mean that if you overguess without intending to and hit something behind, the shot is cancelled? That sounds absurd.
Damn, I remember why I gave up GW and their inability to write concise rules...
Ah well, if that is how it is...
-
Overguessing is absolutely lame. Anybody that overguesses should be removed from the game, not the artillery weapons. You can, however, guess at the line in front of the unit you want to hit and hope it scatters past that. (Or, with a cannon, it bounces ten inches). That is legal, and the way to go.
Everytime you overguess, your soul dies a little. Just like with special characters.
I find it much easier to hit things with rocket launchers than mortars, because I always guess short.
Well, I remember one certain 24" guess, that was, if anything, perfect in almost every way.
-
So if I fire at a unit of 25 guys (5 wide by 5 deep) and it's very obviously 16" to the front rank, if I guess 18" so that I can hit the center of the unit and max out on the number of guys under the template, that's cheesy because I can't actually see those back ranks?
:engel:
-
But the target is the model in front, which you have LOS to....you're just overguessing. That would mean that if you overguess without intending to and hit something behind, the shot is cancelled? That sounds absurd.
You can see the front rank, you can see the unit. If you see a part of the unit, you can shoot the unit. You do not only need to target the models you can see, you can hit any part of the unit once it is spotted.
Damn, I remember why I gave up GW and their inability to write concise rules...
What can be clearer than "You cannot shot a unit your warmachine cannot see"?
Phil
-
Probably not, Philly. I fail to see what Kaptajn have problems with... I guess he objects to the fact that you cannot know totally for sure that your opponent was deliberately overguessing rather than just being crap at ranges. But it should become clear during the game.
So he objects because you cannot strictly enforce the rule if you face an overguesser.
The thing is, Kaptajn, it is a rule that also take into account that a gamer should not be a dick. Infact, the rule is based on you being an honest person and having a conscience. Not your opponent, but you yourself. It is a rule that primarily is meant to be enforce by onceself. It is rather simple, because it do not want to distract the players from the battle.
It assumes you are a nice guy and not a cheater. A nice guy does not think "Wohaa, that is openended. I can use that to my advantage!" but a cheater and unsporty fellow thinks that way. He just wanna win and do not give a fuck about your feelings. He is not a Warhammer player and should stick to chess or something. He misuses the thruts the game developers have put in the players to make sure both are having a good time.
IF you deliberately overguess, you are NOT targetting the unit you aim for. Simple as that. It does not matter what you say, or where you claim to aim. If you do that, but overguess hoping to hit something else, you are a cheat and a fraud and would deserve my blunt viking sword on the head or over yer buttocks!
-
I like consistent and clear rules with little room for interpretation and open-endedness. It is quite possible to write such rules. That's all there is too it. Unless there is some extensive errata not in the rulebook, there doesn't appear to be anything in the 7th edition that prevents you from overshooting with cannon and stone throwers/mortars as long as you nominate a target in LOS. I do get that this is considered bad sportsmanship, and I don't have a problem with that.
Mathi, a headshot would take you out of the match (unless we're doing Huscarl, of course, in which case good luck) and I don't go down to runners or kissy-killls much these days :biggriin:. Which group are you with?
-
ok....so i got a question my friend is horrible at guessing range in 40k before the new rules he would miss everytime almost he hit more when he scattered into a unit then landing on them...so what about him? say goblins are 20 inches away and 1 inch behind their last rnak the orcs are lined up what if he guessed 26 inchs....you just going to be like oh your shot is cancelled and void hahaha i am a dick of a gamer who won't let your shot count? no...Mathi Alfblut is right it's more like if the shooter wants to be gay and a dick he can be or he can be like oh i will be honest and humble and shoot at something not worth shooting at....
this game is a competition to destroy your enemy and become a mastermind tactician...me and my friends love this game and have a blast but we don't bend over and take it in our arse's just so a complainer who is losing a game can get his way....
most of you can't grasp this concept i know i'm sorry your to whatever you are....but the game was made to well lets be honest to be a game and what are games about?....proving your better and winning it's a competition just like football....you don't see a college football coach go ok we won't do a reverse play because that would be tricky and low handed and we want to make sure they can tackle us....
hahaha seriously?
i understand it's not right i understand the rule says only shoot what you can see but if you overguess there is no way to prove you shot wrongly...next time i underguess well shoot...i missed my target lets add on a few inches!?!?....sounds fair to me....
no you see you can be a jerk and overguess but in reality there is no way to stop that they are guess weapons for a reason the most you can do other than complain and show how unsportsman like YOU!!! ARE!!! is take it like a man and be like fine you want to play dirty do it i will play honestly and open, when you do this....
then...then you become the real man!
-
That whole post needs a capital letter somewhere in it to be coherent.
You know when someone overguesses because they suck and when they do it because they meant to. You just know it. Think back, 90% of the time you knew it when it happened. Lacking a referee, you need to call cheating when you see it. If you are unwilling to, let it go. The scatter/guess rules are fine and aren't poorly written to the point of not working, they are just a tad open ended because they rely on player input rather than just naming a target and rolling a dice.
Phil
-
Oh... can I take the ear protection of, Lord Tilioth?
Firstly, Warhammer is not really designed like you describe. How runs the most important rule in Warhammer? The number one rule players should abide with all the time, if you really want to follow GW:s rules. Still, it is possibly the rule people breaks the most.
Well, I await your answer.
While doing that, I will talk to Kaptajn:
A headshot delivered with a mace will take anyone out of the match, thanks. And yes, I prefer Housecarl over normal re-enactment fighting, since I really do medieval mostly, and then, people had helmets anyway. And I would prefer it doing migration period too, that is closer to the viking fighting when it comes to the general kit of the combattants. Despite that, I prefer the whole body as target, since it does not favour an unrealistic fighting style and does to much favour to the swords or axe visavi the spear.
So what do you say? If not Housecarl, Norwegian medieval re-enactment fighting rules, with upper arms and cutting spears please.
Oh, and at the moment I am not training that much, but I trained together with the vikings in Gothenburg before. Now we are going to start some Housecarl and medieval re-enactment training in our own group, Jacobs Ledung.
-
To clarify further, my need for precice rulings probably comes from my Warmachine/Hordes playing these last two years.
So what do you say? If not Housecarl, Norwegian medieval re-enactment fighting rules, with upper arms and cutting spears please.
Since I am one of the original Norwegian reenactment fighting guys, yes please. I'm with Kongshirden 1308 and Gråsida.
Maces don't work properly in reenactment fighting, sadly.
-
most of you can't grasp this concept i know i'm sorry your to whatever you are....but the game was made to well lets be honest to be a game and what are games about?....proving your better and winning it's a competition just like football....you don't see a college football coach go ok we won't do a reverse play because that would be tricky and low handed and we want to make sure they can tackle us....
I thought games were about having fun :?
-
I thought games were about having fun :?
Um, no. They are about crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentations of their women.
-
Games are for fun, did anyone see that in my last post? apparently not....Maybe i stressed the whole it's about competition thing to much...Well it's about winning to me and my friends at least
Mathi,
To have fun above all else thats the rule it's in the first few pages of the rule book i'm not stupid...but thanks for your concern...
Back to the rest,
games are about having fun, and dominating...
Phil,no comment be more poilite seriously i am tired i work 8 hour shifts after school for 8 hours and today i pulled a double so i pretty much worked all day though i managed a few breaks and hey that was me yesterday too...so yeah i'm tired and puncuation doesnt matter sorry
-
I thought games were about having fun :?
Um, no. They are about crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentations of their women.
naw, thats whats best in life!
I think games are about having fun, I have crushed small children underneath my boot with swift harshness, but got no real satisfaction from it...
-
sniper but that is not fun at all....when i verse little kids i help them out and encourage them to play to have fun....i am talking about people your own age who are your close friends....it becomes a competition then when i verse random people at GW or especially little kids who are trying to learn i might even make stupid mistakes to get them pumped and wanting to play more...i don't go and walk all over them lol
you made your point for sure
-
Sorry Kaptajn and Tilioth for my earlier haughty and arrogant tone. I was not in my best condition and really tired.
I realize that some find fun in the competitive side, and if you and your friend are in agreement, then you are doing it right, Tilioth. I merely want to say that it is not necessarily the norm among players.
I play Warhammer in fluffy competitive mode. Yes, I like to win, but I do not want to go cutthroat to do it. My friend was not really cutthroat before, but he suddenly became more cutthroat when he got the new VC books. But it is partially because he fails to see the huge increase of power in the book and see huge among of magic as necessary to play at all now.
My reasonably competitive but also themed WE list suddenly became mediocre against him.
But in the end, it is about having fun and a great exiting game for me. I love it when things end around a draw or a hard won minor victory for either, then you usually have had a really tight game down to the finish.
I also select my army based on the units I like, rather than one that I know technically always would be the best. Hence I would rather take Waywatchers over a treeman, for example.
To me, I find it equaly true to find this themed & competitive approach among older persons, like me, instead all getting fully competitive. To me this is a story game, a fantasy game, not a win at all cost.
When I play historical wargames I play to win, as do most other gamers. You want to try and change history or you want to make sure history happens as it should. Then me and my friend play just as you and your friend. Same with Chess or Hnefatafl. But Warhammer is much more for me, since it involves painting nice regiment with personal standard, creating histories for them and their heroes, maybe even recording their great deeds from battle to battle etc...
-
First of all, Lord Tilioth, learn to use capitals. It's not that hard, many people can manage it, I'm sure you can too.
Tilioth, no-one is saying you shouldn't play to win... But a game is, in the first place, about having fun. Not about winning, winning and winning again. Sure it's a part of it, and the competition in it is what keeps us playing over and over again. We all like to win, after all. And certainly against people with the same mindset, there is no harm in being very competitive - as long as you both have fun.
Also, no-one is saying that a shot that is overguessed and hit something behind the intended target, shouln't count... Of course it does. But on the other hand, itstates in the rules that deliberatly over-guessing is cheating, so, well, don't. If it happens, good for you, but you have to be a bit honest with yourself and not do it on purpose I think. There's really no other way to check it.
ok....so i got a question my friend is horrible at guessing range in 40k before the new rules he would miss everytime almost he hit more when he scattered into a unit then landing on them...so what about him? say goblins are 20 inches away and 1 inch behind their last rnak the orcs are lined up what if he guessed 26 inchs....you just going to be like oh your shot is cancelled and void hahaha i am a dick of a gamer who won't let your shot count? no...Mathi Alfblut is right it's more like if the shooter wants to be gay and a dick he can be or he can be like oh i will be honest and humble and shoot at something not worth shooting at....
this game is a competition to destroy your enemy and become a mastermind tactician...me and my friends love this game and have a blast but we don't bend over and take it in our arse's just so a complainer who is losing a game can get his way....
most of you can't grasp this concept i know i'm sorry your to whatever you are....but the game was made to well lets be honest to be a game and what are games about?....proving your better and winning it's a competition just like football....you don't see a college football coach go ok we won't do a reverse play because that would be tricky and low handed and we want to make sure they can tackle us....
hahaha seriously?
i understand it's not right i understand the rule says only shoot what you can see but if you overguess there is no way to prove you shot wrongly...next time i underguess well shoot...i missed my target lets add on a few inches!?!?....sounds fair to me....
no you see you can be a jerk and overguess but in reality there is no way to stop that they are guess weapons for a reason the most you can do other than complain and show how unsportsman like YOU!!! ARE!!! is take it like a man and be like fine you want to play dirty do it i will play honestly and open, when you do this....
then...then you become the real man!
-
Mathi it's ok don't worry about it i myself was having a bad day and got aggravated....going cut throat eh? lol....It's not really that bad but my friends have always played dirty cheap and low to just win, So i guess i have taken after them to win in warhammer...but in my defense i try to have fun...
So do we have a conclusion?
Overshoot is technically cheating though technically can't be stopped, but it's more like a moral situation. Try not to do it, and avoid it if you can but if it happens by accident well mistakes do happen......
Also i think we finally came down to realize you can't have fun without some competitiveness because it drives us, BUT Warhammer is about FUN!!!! in the end, and if i had to choose between either stomping on a little kid trying to learn to get another victory, Or helping him out cracking jokes and showing him a good time...well i think you all know what we all would do....
-
CRUSH!! :evil:
Because I suck so hard in Warhammer that I couldn't teach him how to roll a die :blush:.
-
puncuation doesnt matter
It does if you want people to take your posts seriously. And if you want to keep posting on this forum.
-
puncuation doesnt matter
It does if you want people to take your posts seriously. And if you want to keep posting on this forum.
Heed his words, for he was one of the origional fellowship before they found hobbits cost less to feed.
its true story
-
That's right.
-
PhillyT says die, I say ban him!
(or suffer the consequences from pervert Santa)
-
So if I fire at a unit of 25 guys (5 wide by 5 deep) and it's very obviously 16" to the front rank, if I guess 18" so that I can hit the center of the unit and max out on the number of guys under the template, that's cheesy because I can't actually see those back ranks?
I'd really like to see an answer to this, and if it is okay to do that how, is it different from overguessing to hit a screening unit.
-
Wasn't there a rule in 6th edition that stone throwers were allowed to overguess, so long as they had line of sight to at least one unit in the direction of fire? I think it's what Siberius was alluding to on the first page of this thread, but I forgot about it until now. Is that still there? Although, someone may have mentioned that already, since I haven't read the second page at all.
Still, I don't think shooting over a screening unit is bad. Mortars aren't much good anyway, so who cares?
-
Well, maybe not.
However, stop crying ban. Give the fellow a wee break! Philly and Shadow, have a beer each on my account and go sit over there grumbling! :::cheers:::
-
stop crying ban. Give the fellow a wee break!
Give who a break? PhillyT? :icon_confused:
-
no, tilloth.
capitalisation is over rated.
-
On the other hand, it's not difficult to do, and you look like a fool if you appear unable to do it. :icon_razz:
-
not looking like a fool is overrated too.
-
Anyway, returning to what I said earlier:
Wasn't there a rule in 6th edition that stone throwers were allowed to overguess, so long as they had line of sight to at least one unit in the direction of fire? I think it's what Siberius was alluding to on the first page of this thread, but I forgot about it until now. Is that still there?
It turns out there was, but there isn't in 7th edition. So that was another useful post.
-
I think the point needs to be made, why would you try to shoot the orcs anyway?
The whole point of the rule allowing screening of units is to prevent people just targetting at will. The current game rules allow you to set tables up as you see fit, so just make sure both sides have a hill on them, then you can place your mortar on there.
-
I don't see the problem with over-guessing at all. Perhaps if it is more than 12", but really I don't care a bit. There is no weapon in the game that is powerful enough for that to matter, and also, If the rulebook said "its totally legal to over guess, we encourage it!", then none of the guess weapons of the game would be under priced either. There are far more underhanded and unrealistic tactics and "uses" of the rules as written in this game to get riled up about.
Also it seems odd to me that most of the people posting are more accepting of a cannon over-guessing or "accidentally" hitting an unintended target than if a mortar or helstorm does it. The last two are indirect fire weapons, if either family of weapons were entitled more slack in this department I would have naturally assumed it was the indirect fire weapons, but ok.
And even if the models are kicking up dust and there is all the din of battle working to 100% obscure the army behind them, if I'm an experienced empire commander or artilleryman (in the fluff) I know that the goblins can be dealt with by the state troops and that usually there are much more scary and brutal creatures lurking behind them, so It would make sense to use my precious time and ammunition firing just behind them knowing it is their transparent (pun intended) tactic at screening the real nasties of their force which are inevitably part of a waaagh (seeing as how orcs don't have a penchant for tactics).
Bottom line, this isn't so black and white, its not really cheating, and its not really legal, its a matter of whether or not you find it acceptable. Philly is right that you know an over guess when you see one, but I think that any within reason is perfectly acceptable. Just my opinion though, I hope its not going to get me killed... :icon_rolleyes:
-
ZehKaiser
You made your point well, i would have to agree with you and conclude that this is the proper answer...Well done!
-
Anyway, returning to what I said earlier:
Wasn't there a rule in 6th edition that stone throwers were allowed to overguess, so long as they had line of sight to at least one unit in the direction of fire? I think it's what Siberius was alluding to on the first page of this thread, but I forgot about it until now. Is that still there?
It turns out there was, but there isn't in 7th edition. So that was another useful post.
Yes, yes! It was what I was alluding to! I saw some kinda tactica or one of those things in a White Dwarf where they explained that mortars and the like could over shoot if there was something to shoot there but not cannons. And I guess I was saying that maybe a lot of people's opinions on the matter are a hangover from that time, when it was ok to do so.
:happy:
Whew. :-P
-
Christ, you do not need to see the model you are shooting at, if you can see the UNIT you can shoot it. Any part of it you like. YOu have seen the UNIT.
Is it really that difficult to understand? Honestly?
Phil
-
The war machine targetting rules have changed over and over again. I can recall the WD article Siberius was on about. I have also just found my 2002 annual and read the old, bizarre rules in there - it says Stone Throwers can shoot over models they can see at targets beyond (i.e. they only need enemy in the line of fire) BUT mortars cannot do so. The mortar rules have a bit about deliberate overguessing being unfair - but this is just after having allowing it, albeit in a limited way, for stone throwers.
So yup, this game does frustrate a tad at times. I try to stick to the current rules, and slip up only when I have a senior moment and start re-enacting some wargame from years ago! People usually remind me pretty quick that my rules are drifting through the space-time continuum.
In terms of sense, however, it does seem weird at times that when an enemy army has a light screen of whatever out front, then the huge blocks of horn blowing, drum bashing, flag waving dudes behind can't be seen. Perhaps one should presume it is due to the need for the crew to guestimate distance with mathematical tools and such which don't work if you can't really see the enemy properly, or something?
My friends and I always end up having to use house rules, such as that buildings are not actually taller than hills (which in terms of models they usually are) or that small units immediately behind buildings cannot be targeted from hills on the other side of the building, but if the unit is big enough, or not touching the building, then it can be seen. This latter kind of house rule needs a good spirit of sportsmanship between players, as it is not a precise rule, but tries to fit circumstances.
As for gamers playing to win, I know the kind, and it is a cruelly frustrating and often uncomfortable way to play. I play (childishly) to make up a little story in my head. (Thus my recent post where I write the little stories down afterwards!!)
-
The reason I was so frustrated at the time and why I didn't let him use his screen is the fact that 1) all of there army ( except maybe 400pts on the left side of the battlefield) was situated in a 12'' radius behind the goblins or in the forest next to them. The dumbest general in the world would know that an army of orcs and wood elves was in that sector ( especially if there was a cloud of dust and a forest of spears and banners behind 4 feet goblins). 2) I have a relatively modern view of using artillery. Artillery( mortars, catapults,etc) are psychological weapons more then anything else. There shooting in the GENERAL area of the enemy to make them duck for covert or protect there valuables ( important people or objects... not the other valuable thing) denying them the ability to defend there position effectively ( in warhammer terms, there numbers and row bonus). There designed for indirect fire, and in that sense , warhammer does an excellent job at recreating that.
I agree that forests, buildings, hills,etc block line of sight for artilery. If you don't even know what is behind the object, you don't really have a reason to aim there ( except if somebody told you by radio or...pigeon messaging... that there is something to aim there). But 4 feet goblins... I think this is the kind of situation that warhammer lets you bend the rules a bit.
Personally
-
not looking like a fool is overrated too.
We know. You are a constant reminder of that.
-
Twiggle: There is no bending the rules in that case. It blocks line of sight. Additionally, catapults and such were not exactly area attack weapons. Their effectivenss verses troops is already overstated. They just weren't that good in their game terms.
The line of sight rules are thankfully easy to know and follow. If you and your friends want to 'bend' them, so be it. In a store, expect to need to, you know, actually follow the rules.
Phil
-
Indeed, the way catapults works in Warhammer is VERY fictious. In Warhammer, stone throwers works like the equivalent of modern day artillery.
The mortar could work like that, since it was designed to have a shell that explodes and sent shrapnel flying. But catapults mostly threw rocks. Indeed, experiments have shown that you can fire a bucket of smaller stones, instead of the big one, and there is even some archaeological observations from Eketorp fort at Öland indicating a possible use of a light stone thrower as an indirect area weapon to help cover a gateway in an outer wall.
But it is very limited in that sense. It was most likely prepared and aimed at the gate as preparation for an eventual attack, not in the heat of the moment. It was a fixed weapon, not a field weapon.
You could throw fire and such, and the romans did on occasions, but it was rare to have heavy catapults in the field. Bolt throwers, yes, rock throwing catapults and trebuchets, no.
They where siege weapons, not battlefield weapons. And in sieges, their main task was to throw large blocks of rock, aiming to destroy structures rather than targetting personnell, weakening walls for example.
And wether a rock would shatter or not on impact depends heavily upon what it impacts upon.
The only rock type I think would shatter and with pretty lethal result, is flint/firestone, and that would send razorsharp splinters in every direction, but I have no clear evidence for it´s use as a specific ammunition in a historical context.
So, you cannot really look at history to judge the use of catapults and mortars in warhammer, since they are used in a very made-up way akin to modern day artillery.
Pretty odd is it. You can use catapults in a rather bizzare way in warhammer, but hell no, you cannot have your archers fire a proper arrowhail in several ranks.
Well, everything to make strange gizmos needed, I guess. The warhammer races are all to stupid to use archery in an effective way. :icon_razz:
-
What's up with that Phillyt guy... he's not what I would call '' pleasant''.
-
What's up with that Phillyt guy... he's not what I would call '' pleasant''.
:biggriin: :biggriin: :icon_lol: :icon_lol: :eusa_clap: :eusa_clap: EPIC!
( :engel: Sorry PhillyT - I couldn't resist - at least he's polite about it!)
EDIT - BTW, I agree with PhillyT.
-
My ex-wife would give two thumbs WAY up!
Have one on me Twiggle. Your alright, except for when you're not.
:::cheers:::
Phil
-
What's up with that Phillyt guy... he's not what I would call '' pleasant''.
That is indeed epic. But he's just a little annoyed because people keep on bending the rules and then try to defend doing that, whilst we all know that it isn't the sportiest thing to do.
-
What's up with that Phillyt guy... he's not what I would call '' pleasant''.
In bed he is!
On this forum, I think he do quite well.
-
I thought games were about having fun :?
Um, no. They are about crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentations of their women.
023, you win the thread!
-
I thought games were about having fun :?
Um, no. They are about crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentations of their women.
023, you win the thread!
You've seen his paint work right? 023 just wins. :::cheers:::
-
I thought games were about having fun :?
Um, no. They are about crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentations of their women.
023, you win the thread!
You've seen his paint work right? 023 just wins. :::cheers:::
I concur...
-
Historically, field artillery was a relatively rare bird until the 16th-17th century in Europe. Light torsion-powered bolt throwers appear in roman and medieval times, yes, but even then they were rather thin on the ground. When cannon appeared in the 14th century, it made the occasional appearance in field battles, as at Crecy and Flodden and whatnot, and became increasingly more common.
As Mathi notes, catapults, trebuchets and by extension the larger torsion engines were primarily fixed-defense positions or attacks on defensive positions. Trebuchets had small wheels, but these were there to improve the accuracy and strength of shot (the horizontal energy needs somewhere to go or the trebuchet will "buck") - all larger throwing engines had to be packed down for transportation.
But that debate really matters little to Warhammer (and indeed most fantasy miniatures rules systems), because, let's face it, the games are incredibly unrealistic - and not only in terms of the supernatural elements. One needs only start with the "Eye in the sky" general that actually can see all his troops and see all movement by the enemy! That's quite fine - I find Fields of Glory and similar games attempts at realism (which still use EitS) often makes the games static and quite boring - even if their realism often is only skin deep. So much better Warhammer/Warmachine/etc - focus on the game, fluff and fun, rather than realism.
-
I thought games were about having fun :?
Um, no. They are about crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentations of their women.
023, you win the thread!
You've seen his paint work right? 023 just wins. :::cheers:::
Please, do mention the word 'epic'.
-
The warhammer races are all to stupid to use archery in an effective way. :icon_razz:
Hey! I have never had a problem getting all my archers in a unit to be able to fire.
-
But that debate really matters little to Warhammer (and indeed most fantasy miniatures rules systems), because, let's face it, the games are incredibly unrealistic - and not only in terms of the supernatural elements. One needs only start with the "Eye in the sky" general that actually can see all his troops and see all movement by the enemy! That's quite fine - I find Fields of Glory and similar games attempts at realism (which still use EitS) often makes the games static and quite boring - even if their realism often is only skin deep. So much better Warhammer/Warmachine/etc - focus on the game, fluff and fun, rather than realism.
While I agree with most of what you say, the big thing for me that Historicals (like FoG) have over Warhammer is the way that troops break. One round of combat does not normally send a unit running in FoG while it frequently does in Warhammer. Additionally, you (almost) always have a game in Field of Glory, while in Warhammer, one bad string of terror rolls can send your whole army running without a fight (see Slannesh deamons for more information).
-
But that debate really matters little to Warhammer (and indeed most fantasy miniatures rules systems), because, let's face it, the games are incredibly unrealistic - and not only in terms of the supernatural elements. One needs only start with the "Eye in the sky" general that actually can see all his troops and see all movement by the enemy! That's quite fine - I find Fields of Glory and similar games attempts at realism (which still use EitS) often makes the games static and quite boring - even if their realism often is only skin deep. So much better Warhammer/Warmachine/etc - focus on the game, fluff and fun, rather than realism.
While I agree with most of what you say, the big thing for me that Historicals (like FoG) have over Warhammer is the way that troops break. One round of combat does not normally send a unit running in FoG while it frequently does in Warhammer. Additionally, you (almost) always have a game in Field of Glory, while in Warhammer, one bad string of terror rolls can send your whole army running without a fight (see Slannesh deamons for more information).
True enough, but in my view that is a problem (if more realistic); the games become more static, with battlegroups locked together for several rounds.
-
Historically, field artillery was a relatively rare bird until the 16th-17th century in Europe. Light torsion-powered bolt throwers appear in roman and medieval times, yes, but even then they were rather thin on the ground. When cannon appeared in the 14th century, it made the occasional appearance in field battles, as at Crecy and Flodden and whatnot, and became increasingly more common.
Two minor points... One is the "new" Burgundian cannons in the 15th century, and Chuck5's bigass artillery train. Or trains, since he kept losing them. Didn't the 15th century Ottomans have piles and piles of cannon, too?
Also, 16th century artillery *is* relevent, since that's the period that's, uh... "inspired" the Empire army in the first place.
In any case, WFB mixes eras and at some point made some attempt to model some real world physics into the rules in the early days, which is where the cannon and mortar came from. Granted, doom divers, pigeon bombs and robo-horses have sort of thrown that all out the window... but I'm not sure the cannon and mortar rules are that far in fantasy-land. Everything in the game gets abstracted to a certain extent. This is then tempered with tweaks to balance the rules within the game. I remember when artillery could fire indirectly. I though that was fine. They changed the rules at some point, I'm fine with that. It's a game. Instead of complaining about having to shoot at a goblin screen, I'll either find a hill, find a better target, or find a different way to deal with the situation as it's happening.
Oh, and thanks Captain Tineal, Perambulator and Warlord. :lol:
After typing that I drew out plans for a T-Shirt including that reference. I'd like to make one like this:
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a195/ZeroTwentythree/personal/todo.jpg)
-
Also, 16th century artillery *is* relevent, since that's the period that's, uh... "inspired" the Empire army in the first place.
One minor correction of sorts: The landsknecht era is more like the early 17. century.
-
No, the landsknecht era is the 16th century, the early 17th century is the era of the 30 years wars beginnings and it saw the development form the terricos toward the dutch system and to the system developed by Gustav Adolf.
But already in the beginning, the 17th century was about pike and shoot.
-
Oooops! you are right of course! Guess that'll teach me to post quickly while passing through... :blush:
-
After typing that I drew out plans for a T-Shirt including that reference. I'd like to make one like this:
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a195/ZeroTwentythree/personal/todo.jpg)
That is 6 kinds of awesome. You win the thread again.
-
After typing that I drew out plans for a T-Shirt including that reference. I'd like to make one like this:
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a195/ZeroTwentythree/personal/todo.jpg)
:eusa_clap: :eusa_clap: :eusa_clap: :eusa_clap:
-
lol yes this topic is way off subject but who cares....i would buy that shirt and wear it to school once a week
-
This is why my VC army is based on Conan. Love that quote.
-
It becomes even funnier if you check only the bottom box.... No?
-
lol it does
-
I would buy that shirt.
-
I think we're settled then. So who's footing the bill for 1000 odd t-shirts?
-
I used to be a teeshirt designer for a silkscreen company. It is surprisingly affordable.
Phil
-
How I feel about this is if your shooting a cannon ball at a specific enemy skirmisher 2 inches away guessing 25 inches which accidentally hits the enemy charcter...
I agree go die!
However if you are shoting a mortor or rocket battery at a unit thats give or take 5 inches I would say its fine... if a screen unit is 100 wide and one deep, I'm gonna aim for the area that has something behind it. Incase it drifts your more likely to hit something. I feel this is fine. Because with an artilary dice going between 2 and 10 inches its hard to say which one they were trying to hit.
-
I used to be a teeshirt designer for a silkscreen company. It is surprisingly affordable.
Phil
If we used the same company my school does... $10 per shirt so... $10000!
-
While I agree with most of what you say, the big thing for me that Historicals (like FoG) have over Warhammer is the way that troops break. One round of combat does not normally send a unit running in FoG while it frequently does in Warhammer. Additionally, you (almost) always have a game in Field of Glory, while in Warhammer, one bad string of terror rolls can send your whole army running without a fight (see Slannesh deamons for more information).
Well, this was done in the name of streamlining the game and making it play faster. In older editions, lost combats resulted in a "push back" of a certain distance (I forget how much), and the winner of the combat got a +1 to hit on the next round of combat. So you could have an actual battle line locked in combat, and hope to push or break through in a spot to take advantage of this. I haven't played FoG, but DBM/DBA/DBR work something like this (as do HotT and Fantasy Rules! as far as fantasy games go.) I remember playing games to 8 turns rather than 6, though, and taking 3 hours -- though we were playing 3000 points at that time.
I think this is why the game has become focused on hammer units/characters and gimmicks that can make the quick kills or breaks without having to worry about battle lines or traditional/historical tactics. Sort of like card games, maybe. The dynamics of this seem to be constantly shifting, though (I guess thats why they call it "dynamics" rather than "statics," heh.) For example the increases in ITP troops, the increae in fear causers, which then leads to a deterioration in the way that many fear causers used to win combats, etc. So yeah, once again, a bit like card games.
-
Naw. Shitty Teeshirts are about $2. The design part is what often costs a little, $100 or so. It is then all the labor. If all you want is a single color, which means only one screen (the most expensive part of the thing) it takes about 30 seconds per shirt and only the one screen. If you have ten shirts on a manual screen printing press, then you can crank them out. Provided you know the manufacturer, it is a bargin. I made a few shirts at cost, basically all I had to pay for was the screen itself and the shirt.
I made a few tee shirts which read "Who dilly! Whose your Philly?" after hours. The design part was fun, but the guy I worked for was a dick, didn't understand how much a graphic artist was suppoed to be paid, and had a shitty work environment since it was me and 5 of his family members. A little uncomfortable. I ended up quiting at the end of the summer and goign back to teaching photohop classes.
Phil
-
Historically, field artillery was a relatively rare bird until the 16th-17th century in Europe. Light torsion-powered bolt throwers appear in roman and medieval times, yes, but even then they were rather thin on the ground. When cannon appeared in the 14th century, it made the occasional appearance in field battles, as at Crecy and Flodden and whatnot, and became increasingly more common.
Two minor points... One is the "new" Burgundian cannons in the 15th century, and Chuck5's bigass artillery train. Or trains, since he kept losing them. Didn't the 15th century Ottomans have piles and piles of cannon, too?
Also, 16th century artillery *is* relevent, since that's the period that's, uh... "inspired" the Empire army in the first place.
Er, yes, that's why it says "16th-17th centuries" above.
There were piles and piles of cannon from the late 14th century on, but I was talking about FIELD artillery (Artillery trains tend to equal siege artillery) - and of course there was some field artillery, earlier than the 15th century, but it was, as stated, a rare bird.
-
Ah, but I like the push and shove of a battleline. :icon_sad:
My mate also miss it and as he has been with Warhammer a long time missed formation and such things aswell.
I guess that is why I love the idea of core stubborn Eternal guards. Shame that your magic defence suffer if you take them. But my son did not like to see his mighty cavalry charge stalling before two units of Eternal guard. :engel:
Now, core Greatswords would be so... :biggriin: