The Push-Back?

Galadrin

Vassal
Other than being kinda neat, what is the point of the push-back rules? Does giving 2" of ground make much difference?
 
Thats a good question. In the most basic form I think the push back is used to depict the momentum of the combat....the scrum moves with the victor. Since the combats in 3e can last multiple rounds the combatants moving back and forth as the see-saw of melee continues can have a major impact on the deployment of follow on troops...and can also bring the winning unit into a dangerous position by exposing their flank to enemy units on either side of the unit they are pushing back.

So in essence I think it is in the rules to make the game a little more random and interesting.

I love the push back....not quite as much as the Free hack...but its one of those 3e rules I like....and miss from future iterations of the game.

Cheers,

Blue
 
Love pushback too! It can really change a battleline and can create an ebb and flow to a battle, especially with long lines. It also serves to make combat more realistic, as the majority of deaths were caused after a unit actually ran away in medieval battle.
 
The push back is ok...

But the pivoting push back - Now you're talking! 8-)

There is also the option of not following up the push back if you're defending an obstacle which would enable you to break off an attack to reform a battle line I suppose.
 
The removal of pushback was one of the main reasons why I hated 4th edition when the rules initially came out. The 2" may not seem like much but when you play and you see the battlelines moving and where it's starting to break it really adds to the flavour of the game. When it was removed along with free hacks and a host of other enjoyable detail to speed up play I stopped playing WHFB down my then local GW.
 
I think Blue is right, pushbacks emulate the momentum of massed combat (if we assume a scale of 1:10 for model:troops) but wrapping around as well is even more fun.
 
I guess I understand the symbolism, but I am wondering more about the mechanical benefit. 2" doesn't seem to be quite enough to push through a battleline, even if you push-back several turns in a row. I suppose you could give +1 Combat results to two or more adjacent friendly units whose front lines form a straight line along the battleline. Then the bonus would effectively be "stolen" by a enemy who charges and pushes back one unit in the battleline.
 
Actually, you'd be surprised how much effect pushback has. I think the thign with pushback is that it is linked to another relatively unique concept in Warhammer 3 - no turn limit.

Without a turn limit, the whole pressure that you need to maximise value from your units falls away, meaning that you can spend a lot more time manouevring - 'wasting turns' in later editions. But, when you have unlimited turns, suddenly the notion that you push a unit back 4 times in a row can make an 8" difference in a line - with no sign of that combat ending. UInless the rest of your line has done the same, you'll have to ask yourself a very real question around the 5th follow up - can I afford to be 10" away from my line?

Also, a real fundamental to the pushback is that it gives the victor the choice of continiung the fight or not - that's not available in later editions - you fight until someone breaks. Pushback disconnects the two units, allowing either to reform, change direction and so on. Perhaps they have different equipment they want to use - Imperial crossbowmen might find it better to push a tough unit back, not follow up and then fire at them with their higher strength crossbows, before receiving the charge again, for instance.

Finally - it gives you some options against units like the undead that don't rout. In later editions of the game, these units are referred to as 'tarpits', because once you've engaged, you're pretty much stuck. By being able to beat them off, you get the change to strategically withdraw.
 
weazil":18odujzw said:
unique concept in Warhammer 3 - no turn limit.
Click to expand...

<beard>

No turn limits in 1E or 2E either.

BTB follow-ups are mandatory unless behind a defensive obstacle (hedge, fence, castle wall, force field) so aren't really a tactical decision, its an effect of being in combat.

Interestingly 1E also forces a rout after 3 pushbacks.

</beard>

Mechanically you get +1 Combat Result bonus for following up. Also I'm not really grokking the "battle-line" thing. Are people really deploying their enitre army in one big straight line and moving them all forward at once? Is there some kind of land-grab rule or spatial ownership advantage I'm missing? Hmm.
 
Zhu Bajie":15teq9rm said:
Also I'm not really grokking the "battle-line" thing. Are people really deploying their enitre army in one big straight line and moving them all forward at once? Is there some kind of land-grab rule or spatial ownership advantage I'm missing? Hmm.
Click to expand...

*looks awkward* As kids we certainly did, we loved the look of armies when we did that. :)
 
I have done it on several occasions. Still do sometimes. It's hard not thinking the game is like a real battle rather than a bunch of rules. Real world sort of stuff is never the best option rules-wise, but it feels (and looks) right. Until it all goes wrong.

I was much more gung ho as a youngster. I once marched a goblin army onto the field in column, 5 units of 25 all in a long row, just so it would look 'cool'. I failed animosity at the front and the whole lot got stuck. A bad start to the battle, and it got worse from then on in. Then again, I can remember that battle, it was great fun, but I couldn't tell you much about the battles for years either side of it.
 
I know Warhammer gets a lot of flack from DBA'ers because it supposedly doesn't do a decent battle line. I feel ya Padre, sometimes the coolest things are the tactically least sound (at least within the constraints of game mechanics—there certainly was a huge advantage to marching in a column) but they are also the most memorable. I wish there was an elegant and flexible yet minimalist way to encourage such cinematic or interesting tactics and choices. Maybe even just allowing the Gamemaster to assign "Yes, Awesome." points when he saw the players doing something great. Maybe they could work like WFRP Fate points?
 
To me it's about the scale of combat, it's totally unrealistic for a few hundred men trying to capture a hamlet to march as a single block and not use terrain.

Suppose it comes from being exposed to the 2E campaigns like Lichemaster, Sven and McDeath. We always had scenery, like woods and buildings and objectives (capture and defend the x), so the idea of not sending skirmishers into the woods, to rain arrows down from behind cover and the cavalry round to the flank, or to capture the bridge first, and instead keeping the entire army marching in a block makes no sense.
 
I always play with a battle line, skirmishers and cavalry are not part of the battle line though so yes they use the terrain. A battle line doesn't have to have units touching units just close enough to support each other. Without a line units can be very vulnerable. I've never found it to be tactically flawed, maybe in all my years I've just played idiots?

Push backs are OK though would be almost meaningless without a battle line! Free hacks are perfect.
The rule I didn't mind changing from 3rd to 4th was reserves to march move. We had already pretty much house ruled this anyway.
 
This is my first post here. Hopefully someone can answer this. What happens when a unit is pushed back and runs into another unit (if one say is behind it)?
 
page 69 has Initiating close combat during a rout:

if a unit is routed through it takes a panic test if it fails it routs too if it stands it is now in the path of the pursuers who contact them and count as charging. The acctual fight does not happen till the next turn and interestingly if the pursuers lose and are pushed pack they will rout.

This covers Routing and you asked about push back I see no clarification but as the push back is 2" I always played that the contacted unit was pushed back too but is not part of the combat I always kept them 1" away from the combat and in their turn they can try and manover out of the way.
 
Thanks! Glad I found this forum. Your answer made sense, that is moving each unit back which is contacted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top