Rerolls... /rant and solutions?

[Krieger]

How is it not believable?

 

99.9 % pass rate with ld 10 and bsb

99.7 % pass rate with ld 9 and bsb

 

Then add in the fact that you don't see a Terror causing charge in every game and the amount of things that are immune terror.

 

I don't know the exact number of gamea I have played or witenessed but I am sure its well with the 100's range.

[Drak]

I think Hero's fix for fear/terror is spot on.

[Krieger]

Again, I am going to disagree with you. Psychology is not out of balance and I have yet to hear anyone but you say it is.

 

Only witnessing only 2 failed Terror tests in "hundreds of games" just isn't believable, sorry man.

 

I've seen tons of game changes failed LD tests. I've failed back-to-back LD10 stupidity tests many times with my cold one chariots. I've failed LD 10 re-rollable frenzy tests. I've seen high elf swordmaster fail a fear test with a re-roll.

 

Sorry, I just don't believe that out of hundreds of games you have only seen 2 failed terror tests.

All of your examples are of tests that occur a lot more often and don't have as many exceptions for immunity (for intance terror only causing fear in fear causing units). There is a fairly large disparity in your comparison.

 

Even if my memory fails me and there were a few I was forgetting. My arguement would still stand.

[McNathanson]

The question of BSB and Ld tests is purely preference.

 

I certainly prefer fewer failed Ld tests in nominal situations.  I love that my Knights will rarely refuse to charge when their general orders them forward and the BSB is nearby, even if it's a big scary undead thing!  I love also that Goblins will hold their ground against a charging Giant if their general is nearby, because they might be scared of the Giant, but they're even MORE scared of the Big Boss Man!  To me failed (unmodified) Ld should be reserved for rare occasions, or when troops get too far from their commanders.  

 

However when a unit is getting pounded to dust it makes sense that they eventually break and run, which they do.  

It's all just so much more cinematic the way 8th plays!  Instead of unscathed units of Elven warriors running off the table edge due to a nearby Dragon saying "boo!", troops will generally fight until they are reduced in numbers to the point where (in my minds eye) they would themselves be like "we're dying! run!"

 

The odds of failing re-rollable Ld tests are well understood; it's just a matter of whether or not one prefers that effect.  For me, as a LONG time player of WFB (since the first edition in fact) it's a hugely welcome change to have armies FIGHT to the death (or at least until they look to be overwhelmed) instead of most of the casualties coming from units - usually with just a few models missing - fleeing off the table :)

[Murphy'sLawyer]

The question of BSB and Ld tests is purely preference.

 

I certainly prefer fewer failed Ld tests in nominal situations.  I love that my Knights will rarely refuse to charge when their general orders them forward and the BSB is nearby, even if it's a big scary undead thing!  I love also that Goblins will hold their ground against a charging Giant if their general is nearby, because they might be scared of the Giant, but they're even MORE scared of the Big Boss Man!  To me failed (unmodified) Ld should be reserved for rare occasions, or when troops get too far from their commanders.  

 

However when a unit is getting pounded to dust it makes sense that they eventually break and run, which they do.  

It's all just so much more cinematic the way 8th plays!  Instead of unscathed units of Elven warriors running off the table edge due to a nearby Dragon saying "boo!", troops will generally fight until they are reduced in numbers to the point where (in my minds eye) they would themselves be like "we're dying! run!"

 

The odds of failing re-rollable Ld tests are well understood; it's just a matter of whether or not one prefers that effect.  For me, as a LONG time player of WFB (since the first edition in fact) it's a hugely welcome change to have armies FIGHT to the death (or at least until they look to be overwhelmed) instead of most of the casualties coming from units - usually with just a few models missing - fleeing off the table :)

Wow, very well put. I would als like to win a game by besting my opponent in Battle instead of just scarring them off the table. Way more fun.

[Krieger]

The question of BSB and Ld tests is purely preference.

 

I certainly prefer fewer failed Ld tests in nominal situations. I love that my Knights will rarely refuse to charge when their general orders them forward and the BSB is nearby, even if it's a big scary undead thing! I love also that Goblins will hold their ground against a charging Giant if their general is nearby, because they might be scared of the Giant, but they're even MORE scared of the Big Boss Man! To me failed (unmodified) Ld should be reserved for rare occasions, or when troops get too far from their commanders.

 

However when a unit is getting pounded to dust it makes sense that they eventually break and run, which they do.

It's all just so much more cinematic the way 8th plays! Instead of unscathed units of Elven warriors running off the table edge due to a nearby Dragon saying "boo!", troops will generally fight until they are reduced in numbers to the point where (in my minds eye) they would themselves be like "we're dying! run!"

 

The odds of failing re-rollable Ld tests are well understood; it's just a matter of whether or not one prefers that effect. For me, as a LONG time player of WFB (since the first edition in fact) it's a hugely welcome change to have armies FIGHT to the death (or at least until they look to be overwhelmed) instead of most of the casualties coming from units - usually with just a few models missing - fleeing off the table :)

I like what you are saying. This is why I like Hero Zero's idea. It's not game changinging, but it would actually do something.

[MexicanNinja]

Wow, very well put. I would als like to win a game by besting my opponent in Battle instead of just scarring them off the table. Way more fun.

That would litterally happen a ton in 7th ed.

 

In fact, terror is a little better in 8th.  In 7th, if you passed a Terror check you didn't test again.  In this edition, you have the chance to keep pushing units around by failed terror tests.

[Kremmet]

Terror was not weaker in the last edition.

1)  You didn't get BSB rerolls.
2) It worked when being charged along with charging.
3)  You had access to the more powerful Fear of 7th.

Not saying I'm going with either side in this argument, just pointing out that Terror is not more powerful in 8th.

[Romes]

The BSB is a 12 inch bubble. It's totally reasonable to almost never fail a terror check within that bubble.

 

Not all terror checks happen in that bubble, and those fail fairly regularly. I actually really like how the BSB works because the potential affects of psychology on the movement phase. Are you 6 inches away from the chaff unit that's about to die? Are you within 12 of the general and BSB? The differential effect of pych checks based on both inspiring presence and BSB bubble constrain the movement of the defender (moving to get the bonuses) and provide different routes to attack for the aggressor (targeting/singling out units that aren't in the bubble, or more importantly, making a move where the best counter is for your opponent to leave the bubble).

 

If your opponent is always on 10 re-rollable, then they're keeping their army in a very constrained space, and that allows you a lot more freedom.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that I would agree that BSB re-rolls were a problem if they covered the entire board, but they don't, and so instead of me they are an additional tactical element.

[MexicanNinja]

The BSB is a 12 inch bubble. It's totally reasonable to almost never fail a terror check within that bubble.

 

Not all terror checks happen in that bubble, and those fail fairly regularly. I actually really like how the BSB works because the potential affects of psychology on the movement phase. Are you 6 inches away from the chaff unit that's about to die? Are you within 12 of the general and BSB? The differential effect of pych checks based on both inspiring presence and BSB bubble constrain the movement of the defender (moving to get the bonuses) and provide different routes to attack for the aggressor (targeting/singling out units that aren't in the bubble, or more importantly, making a move where the best counter is for your opponent to leave the bubble).

 

If your opponent is always on 10 re-rollable, then they're keeping their army in a very constrained space, and that allows you a lot more freedom.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that I would agree that BSB re-rolls were a problem if they covered the entire board, but they don't, and so instead of me they are an additional tactical element.

I completely agree with your statement.  In fact, I was playing a game lasnight and my entire left flank collapsed in a single turn on turn 1.  This forced me to reposition my BSB on a Manticore to get all of my fleers into the bubble of the re-roll to rally.  However, once I did that, I took my BSB out of the position I wanted him to be in but had to make a choice.  Chance what was about to happen on my right flank or let me entire left flank run off the board?