+++ The 7th Ed Thread +++

[Dyvim tvar]

So it's not true that harpies in general will not cause panic. Instead, its a general statement about units with less than Unit Strength 5.

The thing about harpies is that if a unit gets reduced to less than US 5, it will probably take a panic test as a result, and with low leadership, they probably aren't going to be sticking around.

[Darkspear]

I don't know if this has been discussed yet, as I have only read the end of the thread, but it seems to me as though a noble with a Lifetaker on a dark pegasus would be a nice character killer, espcialy mages.

there isn't a need for this. chances are that enemy mages will be hiding in units. bascially IMHO the shooting at characters rule affect M9 characters more than anything else, altered nobles, nike sauruses and such. the thing that really screw mages are almost all dmg causing spells need LOS...wait druchii mages aren't really affected bvy this but rather ASUR mages hee hee hee. time for all magic using asur players to start using their brains and tactical fitnesse in the games.

[Rasputinii]

charge redirecting rules will hurt all cavalry armies alot.

I´m happy someone agrees with me there. I see alot talk over at TWF about the cascading combat and crossfire rules that makes Brets even more 'uber' but my thought was exactly the opposite as soon as I read the charge and flee rules. I think it´s finally the time of the elves as we have at last got some diverting rules worth the name.

Hey,

I would be interested to hear your rationale. I am not saying your wrong, but I haven't given the whole movement thing a huge amount of thought yet, so would be interested to here your reasoning...

Ras

[Linda lobsta defenda]

the problems for brets is that with the lance being 3 models wide they have a very narrow corridor for their enemy in the way thingie. so you can direct them away from your troops easier then with wider formations. which will force them to take smaller wider cavalry units to wipe away your skirmishers and whatnot

[Benji]

Hey,

I would be interested to hear your rationale. I am not saying your wrong, but I haven't given the whole movement thing a huge amount of thought yet, so would be interested to here your reasoning...

Ras

basically what linda said.

you imagine in 6th i put a unit of terradons infront of a lance and screening my stegadon. the lance charges the terras, they flee and the lance redirects into the steg.

in 7th all i need to do is make sure the steg is more than 2" away from the center line of the lance and terradon unit and the enemy in the way corridor will sail past the steg. resulting in a failed charge for the brets. careful positioning of the steg will get me a flank charge even if the terradons get caught. if the brets don't charge i will charge the terradons and the steg at the lance.

[Rasputinii]

Read over the book today. Two interesting things I noticed:

1) If charging and the enemy flees and you would it another unit you can choose not to, and stop 1" away. Makes it possible for some interesting baity procedeurs. Charge screens, make flee, stop 1" away from parent, flee their charge and draw the unit out. Not huge, but interesting none the less.

2) Fast Cav don't autorally, but can shoot on the turn they rally...

Oh and it seems no FAQ is being released about the beasts, therfore Herds will only rank up four wide against small things, making lone monsters very dangerous indeed against herds. So Herds and Ratlers are taking the same sort of accidental but conscious hit. Oh well

Ras

[Dyvim tvar]

But herds do get better in one way. With their Ambush rule, they can come onto the table in a perfect position to take advantage of the "crossfire" rule to destroy units fleeing from combat.

[Eeeeron]

There are still a lot of angry beast players around.

1) If charging and the enemy flees and you would it another unit you can choose not to, and stop 1" away. Makes it possible for some interesting baity procedeurs. Charge screens, make flee, stop 1" away from parent, flee their charge and draw the unit out. Not huge, but interesting none the less.

Sounds like a very complicated tactic, but useful if you need to combine charges to beat an uber-unit.

[Lud von pipper]

Oh and it seems no FAQ is being released about the beasts, therfore Herds will only rank up four wide against small things, making lone monsters very dangerous indeed against herds. So Herds and Ratlers are taking the same sort of accidental but conscious hit. Oh well

Ras

This is most interesting!

I think the rule would make Herds extremely difficult to play if what you say is correct, but I expect A LOT of emendations from GW as soon as the new book will be out (like the one for Ratling and other weird acting units).

[Rasputinii]

Lud: Nope, there will be no FAQs released governing special things to the best of my knowledge. There still maybe, but I believe there won't be. Ratlers will be able to be picked out, Beasts won't get ranks against small units and there are a few little others I do. It seems that GW are sticking by their guns when they say they don't want to have to release a reem of exceptions like they did with 40k...

...Still it was just some red necks, so they might be wrong, but I am inclined to believe the info I have heard....

Ras

[Fr0]

Yeah, Ambush is a bit sweeter.. despite the M4, but they will lose their rank bonus sadly, until BoC gets re-written.

They are all skirmishers anyways so, I guess it makes sense.

Fr0

[Rasputinii]

Fr0: Herds are M5 and only loose their rank bonus against anything that would make them rank up less then 5 wide. Its not that bad....

Oh, I was thinking, it seems that now 6th style redirecting is a waste of time. You may as well fee. You get the same result but only two possible outcomes rather then the thousands we got before. You could potentially move a unit of Riders up in single file on their side right up to the enemy, an bait two r more units, get run down and bring hald the opponents battle line in to your charges. Inrteresting...

Ras

[Tethlis]

I was perusing the latest U.S. White Dwarf (an old habit, since I still enjoy seeing the Golden Demon coverage) and came across Cavatore's discussion of the rule changes. He didn't introduce anything new that hasn't been discussed online for the last few months, but specifically mentioned beast herds as taking a major hit from the new rules. He confirmed that there will be no revision or FAQ addressing the herd issue.

[Frankthetank]

Here's what annoys me about the changes to infantry in 7th Edition:

1) 5-wide for rank bonus: you now lose a rank bonus after your first casualty. To further clarify, what I mean is that it seems to me that you have more ranks going 4-wide than you do 5-wide, thus losing a rank bonus from your first casualty doesn't matter as much, whereas 5-wide it seems to matter more. 5-wide also makes crappy infantry more vulnerable to heavy cav charges and of course dual Bret lances. And I believe you now lose ranks faster than you did going 4-wide, which also doesn't help.

2) No HW/SH bonus to the flanks or rear: this also doesn't help infantry in the least and also favors cavalry. And while it 'makes sense', I thought 7th Ed. would be about boosting infantry in combat. Well, this wouldn't be too bad until you reach the following:

3) Infantry units that are 25 models-strong can't turn to negate flank/rear charges because usually it seems the maximum number of models that can fight have already been engaged anyways. And if you're less than 25 models and you do that nifty turn to negate a flank charge, you now have no rank bonus anyways because you're only 4-wide from that point on. Great, huh?

4) Infantry weapons haven't really changed to be all that more useful, such as spears most notably. I thought spears could have been made vastly more useful, such as making a minimum requirement for unit size with spears and then having that unit form a 'phalanx' and make charging units lose their charge bonuses (such as striking first and strength from weapons) or have similar capabilities.

5) No more lapping around: I didn't think lapping was really that awkward at all and now individual Unbreakable or Stubborn models (Spawn, Treemen, etc) have become even more annoying and even harder for most infantry blocks to shed. And yeah, great, you can reform to expand frontage. However, from my understanding of the new rules, the problem is that after you do so, it's now a permanent formation change until you reform again. So after that combat, you may be too wide and may start hindering your own army or getting multi-charged, etc.

[Fleshcollector]

Just today while playing I encountered all the problems you mentioned with my 20 unit spearelves and yeah, it is different than 6th edition. The new style will require new tricks and tactics and I found that the benefits we Druchii gain completely mitigate the percieved negatives. Don't be discouraged. I massacred a 2000pt Empire all calvary army w/ helblaster with my balanced tournament list

7th edition rocks just fine IMHO and I'm sure we will all adapt soon enough!

Good Hunting

[Eeeeron]

3) Infantry units that are 25 models-strong can't turn to negate flank/rear charges because usually it seems the maximum number of models that can fight have already been engaged anyways. And if you're less than 25 models and you do that nifty turn to negate a flank charge, you now have no rank bonus anyways because you're only 4-wide from that point on. Great, huh?

This is a bit confusing as the book says you can only turn to bring more models into combat but then goes on to say you can't bring less in. I think you should be allowed to keep things even, and still turn.

The other thing I noticed is you can only fight 2 combats in a turn if the other unit is engaged and hasn't fought that round, makes it a little less scary.

[Linda lobsta defenda]

eeeeron: check the rulkes FAQ. Alessio has now stated it is a mistake. You should be able to turn inc ombat if you keep the same number of models fighting (since turning is impossible otherwise)