I choose random charge range however, I actually think a better system is somewhere between like what GW did for the newest edition of horus heresy. Having a set minimum distance you can count on in addition to a smaller random roll, that way you can guarantee short charges, have more likely medium charges, and potential but very unreliable hail mary charges
1 week ago | 8
If i have a Move and a Charge then I prefer random, but if I only have the one chance to move in my turn then I prefer fixed.
1 week ago | 22
Personally i prefer a minimum charge range that is guaranteed, boosted by a dice roll. Especially in a skirmish game with limited or no rerolls
1 week ago | 15
With pre-measuring, I prefer random. That said, I miss the old 40k rules where you declare shots and charges without measuring.
1 week ago | 3
I like random but with a guaranteed minimum and unlikely long bomb charges.
1 week ago | 1
It would add complexity that some might not like, but I would like a system where timing is a factor more than range. E.g. you will make a set distance, but if you are at the far end of that distance and roll poorly, you won't 'hit' until the target gets to react. So they could choose to stand ground and fire into the charge, or try to get out of the way, etc.
1 week ago | 0
I've been talking with my Mordheim group about doing pre-measuring and random rolls similar to Old World
1 week ago | 0
In a game with premeasuring, you need to that random element. In a game that does not allow premeasuring, it can be fixed.
1 week ago | 2
I like what they've done with heresy 3.0 u have a fixed distance setup move then add a random amount with a d6. Still somewhat random over larger distances whereas short charges are almost guaranteed.
1 week ago | 0
Man everyone is describing how The Old World handles charges. You charge your M value (4" for humans, 7 for horses) plus maximum of 2d6. You are definitely going 5", very likely 6, probably 7, but then you are less sure about it. And if you can't reach, you move just the max on the d6 without your M value. Horses get an extra (separate) d6 on top after. Transitioning from the no pre measure of classic whfb with 8" charge where you weren't entirely sure if you'd make it if you were going more than 7 unless you have a keen eye indeed, it feels fun.
1 week ago | 0
Narratively I don’t understand how a charge can ‘fail’ especially over short distances like 3”- do all my knights trip over their shields etc, but it does lend a exciting element of risk. Best combination for me would be mandatorily moving your troops forward regardless of success or not to represent ‘overextending your lines’
1 week ago | 1
Perhaps your troops can always be relied upon to move a certain distance (set charge distances) but you have to roll to muster up enough momentum to get associated impact damage or other charge bonuses
1 week ago | 1
According to the ancient rules of family game night, I prefer the "Monopoly Table Flip." I am, if nothing else, a traditionalist.
1 week ago | 0
The best answer of course is hybrid. Set charge distance plus a random distance. But since the question is theoretical, I'd much rather have fixed. I normally like some randomness, but charge distance is not one of them.
1 week ago | 0
I think the charge should be fixed, but pile-in is somewhat random. This reduces the feelsbad, but still represents chaos of combat.
1 week ago | 0
I think datasheets should use their movement for the charge distance, and a charge success stat ie: 3+ is successful
1 week ago | 0
Fixed. Leave randomness of outcome to the melee. Die roles and mechanics that cause activations to fail, and units to just stand there are a feel bad and should not be in game. I don't care that it can happen to both sides, we both want to actually play the game with our guys, not have them just stand there, fail to do anything, and die.
1 week ago | 0
I would prefer a system that was a mix. Like in Warhammer 40k you could get a D6+6 distance or something like a minimum distance of 5" so you could set up infallible charges longer than 2" but still have some randomness.
1 week ago | 0
Random charge distances suck and from an immersion perspective, they don't make sense. You can add in other risk mechanics that make sense... maybe a To Hit penalty or armor/save penalty for units on the charge. So they can fight first, but may be slightly less effective offensively or at more risk of dying if the charge doesn't wipe the enemy. I like that there's risk/reward for charging into combat, but the current mechanic in Warhammer is bad and the only reasons people like it are familiarity and not having tried/thought about other ideas.
1 week ago | 1
MiniWarGaming
In skirmish wargames, assuming that premeasuring is allowed, do you prefer fixed charge distances or random charge distances?
1 week ago | [YT] | 54