Troop Coherency

[Corlock Striker]

Hello Warlord fans and rule writers,

 

I just picked up a copy of the Warlord Second Edition Rulebook and gave it a read through. Picked that up because I plan on playing Elves. Anyway, Warlord isn't my first tabletop miniatures game, I'm sure my question will make it apparent which game I'm most familiar with. Anyway, like the rules as I understand them, but had a quick question that wasn't answered in my read through of the rulebook. Do the models in a Troop need to stay within a certain distance of each other to retain some semblance of squad coherency or can they conceivably wind up all over the battlefield during the course of play? This leads to another question, if models within a Troop has different movement speeds, do all the models in the Troop need to move at the speed of the slowest model to retain coherency?

[Inarah]

can they conceivably wind up all over the battlefield during the course of play?

 

Yes.

 

This leads to another question, if models within a Troop has different movement speeds, do all the models in the Troop need to move at the speed of the slowest model to retain coherency?

 

Nope.

 

Welcome to the game.

[Ddot]

there is no troop coherency in WL2E. IIRC, there used to be coherency rules in 1st Ed.

 

Of course, most troops will probably be more effective if you maintain some coherency (concentrated shooting and charges, buffing friendlies with magic, etc.)

 

it's a bit unusual as a long-time GW and PP gamer, but it's one of the cool things about WL that they weren't afraid to do some things differently with the game. One of the cool features is the activation/initiative system. In Hordesmachine, players take turns rolling each other, whereas Warlord is set up for a random activation order which truly adds a bit more risk to everything you do.

 

PS, welcome to the boards and the game.

[jdripley]

"You go left, I'll go right. We'll hit him in the middle!"

 

This game is skirmish, through and through. It's chaotic mayhem from the first initiative draw to the final attack. Coherency is for chumps who need their friends!

 

Actually, I often use pretty tight formations even though there's no rule requiring me to do so. I play Dwarves primarily and I often emphasize the defensive aspects of the faction, so I like to present my opponent with a series of solid walls made of Dwarven shields. Though when I play Nefsokar I often loosen things up a bit, with some cavarly in a very wide formation swinging out to a flank, a core of mummies shambling up the middle, and a group of constructs in the vanguard in a loose formation.

 

What you're fighting against also plays into your formation. Say I'm using my Dwarves. I really want to keep the formations tight. But maybe my opponent has loads of Fire mages, or some powerful Storm mages and I'm worried about AOE magic attacks tearing my army apart. I'll keep things loose, spacing my models out quite far - maybe even 2 or 3 inches between models - to mitigate the power of those dangerous spells. Of course, then I'm easier to take apart one by one, so it's all give-and-take. You also may want to loosen up the formation if the opponent is bearing down on you with one or more seriously powerful units. I'm talking Varaug with a Bonesplitter, or some Big Nasty like a Hydra, Rauthuros, Deathsleet, etc. Clumped up troops are tasty treats for models like that. They can crunch two or three a turn easy. But if you present a scattered troop, they can only realistically kill one at a time. When you're ready to take it on, you charge it with everything you've got and pray for high dice and merciful defensive strikes. Or maybe you bait the opponent with two or three clumped up models that you consider to be acceptable losses, and hope he charges in so he's in range for your counter attack!

 

So even though there's "no rule" regarding formations, there actually is quite a lot you can do with that freedom.

[Corlock Striker]

I get the flexability this allows entirely. I just wasn't sure what the rules were regarding coherency as the rulebook makes absolutely no mention one way or the other about it. But thank you for the ellaboration. And thank you for the quick answers. I had actually sort of answered the question for myself after posting this, by reading the thread on the differences between Warlord 1.x and Warlord 2.0 and the thread with the commentary on said changed, but didn't want to double post, and only had a iPhone available for internet access, so editing the post would have been a bit difficult.

[kyaakone]

Welcome