Playbalance & Mercenaries

[Saint Vierzehn]

Managing ranged combat is a vital element of Warlord. Allowing all armies to include mercenary forces helps playbalance the various factions.

 

I would like to see mercenary longbowmen added to the game. I'm thinking range 30, RAV 2, no marksman SA, and about 27 points/model.

 

-StV.

[Castlebuilder]

I would like to see mercenary longbowmen added to the game. I'm thinking range 30, RAV 2, no marksman SA, and about 27 points/model.

-StV.

Since we are talking mercenaries, why not ask for both worlds? How about the ones you propose plus something similar with Marksman for around 40 pts? That would really offer choices.

 

Castlebuilder

[vejlin]

How about a point multiplier for using mercs?

 

I mean they should IMO be slightly overpriced when used to fill a gap in your army list.

[wildbill]

If you look at the current Merc Crossbowmen, they are one point cheaper than my Dwarven Piercers. Every stat is exactly the same except the Mercs have one more movement. The Dwarves also have SA: Volley. I'd rather field the Piercers just because they have Bane. BUT...from a Crusader perspective, the Merc Crossbowmen rule. You can darn near take two of them for one Ivy Crown Archer. Pretty sweet, huh?

 

Wild Bill

[ecs05norway]

The penalty for using mercs to plug a hole in your army list is that you lose your Army Special Abilities.

 

This is changing slightly with the new Mercenary rules (you can take up to 25% of your total build from a single merc company), though.

[Qwyksilver]

This is changing slightly with the new Mercenary rules (you can take up to 25% of your total build from a single merc company), though.

 

Which means no one will even see an Ivy Crown Archer or Khamsin Ranger again (not that we saw much of them to begin with)

[Brushmaster]

Which means no one will even see an Ivy Crown Archer or Khamsin Ranger again (not that we saw much of them to begin with)

Hey , I still use them around here but probably won't if the merc choices are REALLY good .

Just ask SE , they're good to kill goblins but not much else .

[drjsallison]

This is changing slightly with the new Mercenary rules (you can take up to 25% of your total build from a single merc company), though.

 

Which means no one will even see an Ivy Crown Archer or Khamsin Ranger again (not that we saw much of them to begin with)

 

 

I have a real issue with merc forces being incorporated into factions to the point where they render the factions core troops obselete. Mercs should be either bottom of the barrel or very expensive. Cheap and good belittles the other factions.

[Stubbdog]

I understand the thought behind the original question that started this thread. You can ask EE, I am one of the people that makes him grind his teeth the most related to my complaints on range 30 archers all the time.

 

But, I can also say that I agree that each faction needs to have something a little DIFFERENT. Not every faction should have range 30 archers, nor should they really be able to get range 30 archers via mercenaries either.

 

Freelance yes, mercenary no.

[wildbill]

Freelance yes, mercenary no.

 

That's it in a nutshell right there. That's where most of the people have issues with the 25% rule that is supposed to be coming out in the Mercenary book. You can take 25% of your army as Mercs and still maintain army SAs. With Freelance, you get nothing.

 

I've allowed this 25% rule since it came out, just to see what kind of an impact it would have. Two weeks ago was the first time someone used it. Our Crusader player took...no, not crossbowmen...Lupines. He had 4 Lupines and the cheap 26 pt sgt (whose name escapes me at the moment). But, he had designed an army around fast movement and they fit his theme. We thought his army was sweet and said as much. Then we kicked his butt.

 

Wild Bill

[Saint Vierzehn]

That's it in a nutshell right there. That's where most of the people have issues with the 25% rule that is supposed to be coming out in the Mercenary book. You can take 25% of your army as Mercs and still maintain army SAs. With Freelance, you get nothing.

 

 

The Freelance special army ability is that you can take pretty much whatever troops you like. That flexibility is what drew me to Freelance in the first place, and I don't see myself giving up Freelance when the Merc rulebook rolls out.

 

The 25% mercs rule extends a small portion of that flexibility to the other factions, and it helps most those factions that are otherwise pretty weak. Like dwarves, for instance. Those factors add a playbalancing influence to the game, and at the same time it avoids penalizing the purists.

 

The merc longbowmen that I proposed above would make a fine complement for armies that otherwise have a very hard time dealing with heavy-rangepower opponents, while at the same time not making ranged firepower of elf-like proportions a standard feature of every list.

 

There's another consideration, as well. Mercs are their own faction, and poor ranged combat is not an inherent part of their concept. (Not that it is for any faction, IMO, but that's another discussion entirely. My Crusaders want the trebuche that's pictured on p35 of their splat book, and the ballista that are described in the fluff.) Bowmen fit the Merc fluff very nicely, and it's really kind of silly that they're entirely missing from the list.

 

-StV.

[cristomeyers]

I don't like the 25% rule for the same reason as Qwyk. With Merc Crossbows at what, 20 some points apiece why would anyone ever take Rangers or Archers at all? There has to be something to balance out the added flexibility.

 

It does allow for interesting options and fits with the idea of Mercenaries and all, but it shouldn't allow players to essentially min/max out their faction's weaknesses, which is what it strikes me as.

 

But that's just me.

[GreyHorde]

I have a real issue with merc forces being incorporated into factions to the point where they render the factions core troops obselete. Mercs should be either bottom of the barrel or very expensive. Cheap and good belittles the other factions.

Agreed. Don't make me turn about and dislike Warlord for the very reason I started liking it to begin with -- balanced factions with flexible core troops, longevity for collecting, painting and playing. Too cheap + too good = 'broken' and throws away the very balance that's central to the game, making it another game system where only the latest troops and rules editions are desirable.

[spiritual_exorcist]

A 25% rule would really get my blood boiling, I've kept my mouth shut on the subject, but let me at this time add my vote for: NO WAY IN HELL should that happen.

 

And yes, Ivy Crown work just fine when gunning down Goblins, having 2 shots and a 50% with each to take down a Goblin, they would work nearly as well against Bondslaves too.

 

I actually believe they are becoming a little more useful (although still not desirable) them more troop types we see in the game, as many have 8-10 DV and present better targets than the DV 10-11+ deflect.

 

Still I wouldn't advocate using them in most cases.

[vejlin]

maybe modifier to points cost if models are included as part of the 25%

 

So a merc crossbowman costs X points if included in a merc army or a freelance aremy, while he costs 1.5X points if hired as prt of the 2% merc allowance.

 

Would work for me. I agree that mercs should be expensive to ensure they're not a nobrainer addition to your army.