Re: Rule for Outnumbering

From: Stephane Montabert <kotrin_at_...>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:28:51 -0000

> After many years or playing this game and hundreds of games under
my
> belt, intuitively I think the best solution "gamewise" is two
simply
> curtail "ganging up" on stands until all other stands within charge
> range are engaged.

I think none of us can't even come close to your game belly :o) so
you certainly have a strong point by definition...

It seems to be a variant of the proposal #1, but taking attacker
charge range into account rather than 6cm radius around the unit
attempted to be outnumbered - unless I am mistaken.

> Its the simplest, easiest and in my view "fairest" solution.
> It means attackers will have to assault in force and cheese
> tactics of overwhelming one or two stands on the objective while
> ignoring nearby ones would be eliminated with this approach. This
would
> favor horde armies like orcs, IG and tyranids, but thats okay.
Balancing
> that would be small but very good units like terminators and eldar
> aspect warriors which now become a more difficult proposition to
> attackers since they need to be ganged up on.

I agree, but I see a little drawback here. The examples you raise are
valid one, with foot troops of horde armies. Since their charge
movement is usually 20 cm, and since each unit is reasonably
numerous, they can achieve outnumbering according to the rule you
propose because the number of enemies within 20 cm is not too much.

On the other hand, if you take a unit with a wild charge move (Eldar
jetbikes and their 70cm charge range!) it means that this unit will
NEVER be able to outnumber anyone, simply because there will be too
many eligible enemy units within range. You have ten jetbikes, you
want to assault four madboyz 10cm away, but you can't fight 2:1
because there is a full Ork company 65cm away you should assault
too :o)

Or did I miss something?

> As far as how many units can engage "x" unit. I would make the
general
> rule that for a model to "fit" and thus be eligible for close
combat,
> most of its front base need to be in contact (thus only a corner of
the
> base that touches is not enough). The idea of a limit of attackers
per
> unit size can be introduced as a alternate/optional rule or
interpreation.

I agree, some definitions over "base to base contact" should be
specified somewhere. By the way, which is the maximum number of
stands that can assault an infantry stand ? Four or Six ?

Stephane
Received on Thu Feb 19 2004 - 08:28:51 UTC