Cavalry in Age of Sigmar

[swarmofseals]

One thing that has kinda stuck out at me in AoS when compared to WHFB is the generally reduced role for cavalry. While there are certainly some counterexamples, cavalry seems largely overcosted (although this could obviously change with GHB2017) and not that tactically interesting. Cavalry tends to be fast, but between battalion bonuses, allegiance abilities and other special rules there are a lot of things that can be fast. Due to horde bonuses, cavalry often hits more weakly than infantry even on the charge.

In WHFB there were numerous ways to use the various flavors of cavalry to great tactical effect. Rank and flank, disrupting shooters and (at least in older editions) march blocking were all useful and important roles.

That got me thinking: how can cavalry in AoS get some of those roles back without changing the core rules?

These are my preliminary ideas for some special rules that could be added to cavalry warscrolls:

1. Pin them Down!: Enemy units within 1" of this unit can't shoot. This rule would largely be given to light cavalry, giving them the ability to disrupt enemy shooting.

2. Sow Panic!: If this unit slays any enemy models in the combat phase, then that unit doubles the penalty due to those slain models when testing for battleshock if they are within 1" of at least one other unit from your army. This would mostly be given to medium cavalry and mimics the "rank and flank" role. If GW wanted this to be more powerful they could cause it to double the penalty from all casualties and not just casualties caused by this unit.

3. Break Their Lines!: As long as this unit has at least X models, whenever it successfully charges an enemy unit the enemy unit loses all bonuses from its unit size until the end of the battle round. This rule would be mostly granted to heavy cavalry, monstrous cavalry and chariots, with X typically being the minimum unit size.

Most cavalry units would be granted one of these special rules, with some being given multiple abilities to give them added tactical flexibility (Wild Riders might be a prime example).

With Massive Regiments coming, something like Break Their Lines! and Sow Panic! could give some great tactical counterplay. Meanwhile Pin Down! would add some much needed counterplay against the shooting heavy metagame without the need to change or introduce new core rules.

Any thoughts? Do cavalry need more of a defined battlefield role in Age of Sigmar, and might rules like these be an elegant way of upping the profile of cavalry?

[Ratatatata]

Most, if not all, of the typical cavalry units doesn't feel very Age of Sigmar-y for me. I think knights and horses really doesn't suit the high fantasy setting of AoS. Very much do not miss things like the old empire knights or pistoliers or Bretonnia. 

But that's just my opinion, and you're certainly right that cavalry is not very common. 

[MacDuff]

AOS is an era of monsters and men. Even Stormcast Warriors now mount monsters, not horses. Horse-mounted troops are (with a few exceptions involving gigantic warhorses), a vestige of the past. I don't expect big buffs for horse cavalry , but instead an ongoing reinvention of cavalry mounts for armies (humans included), and those mounts I expect to be very buffed.

[Bjarni St.]

Most of the problem is just the lousy warscrolls for cavalry units, including old monstrous cav. Points are kinda high in light of that but ultimately that's most of the problem. 

[swarmofseals]

I feel like maybe I'm not explaining myself very well. When I say cavalry I don't specifically mean dudes on horses -- I mean all of the various flavors of "something riding something else" except for monsters and maybe some fliers. This includes monstrous cavalry and even chariots. 

There are examples of these units being playable and even competitive, but in these cases it's really mostly a case of their stats being pushed for their points cost. I'm not just looking to make "cavalry" cost effective. I'm looking for them to have a unique role on the battlefield. This is why I'm suggesting some abilities that might give them such a role without just pushing their points cost down or their stats up.

[someone2040]

I think it's primarily what we would now consider medium cavalry, or the shock cavalry of the old world that tend to have the issues.

Light cavalry tend to have rules that emphasize a certain type of gameplay, such as running around shooting, or sowing disorder, or hit and running.

But the old world cavalry has this issue where previously, they used to be distinguished by having a slightly higher weapon skill, or strength, or better mounts, or stupidity/immune to psych/frenzy, etc.

But I think your approach of giving all cavalry the same special rule (or one of a set of rules) cuts against the grain of Age of Sigmar. AoS has gone in the direction of trying to make all warscrolls as unique as possible and staying away from similar rules (Apart from where it's more of a 'faction' rule').

 

But I definitely agree that in some ways, you could say the old world cavalry lacks flavour. They essentially boil down to charge in and kill stuff. Which is fine, but I think there needs to be an additional element that you consider which diversifies what type of opponents the cavalry are useful against.

 

But some stuff off the top of my head I could see:

Drakespawn Knights - Rip and Tear - If a unit of Drakespawn Knights kill any enemy models with their Ferocious Jaws, roll a D6. If the result is a 4 or more, the enemy unit suffers D3 mortal wounds as Drakespawns savagely rip into the enemy unit seeking their next meal.

Demigryph Knights - Bloodscreech - Enemy units within 3" of this unit suffer -2 to their bravery if the Demigryph Knights charged in the same turn.

Dragon Blades - Dragon Aspect - Dragon Blades can summon the aspects of long lost Dragons to their side to enhance their prowess in battle. In your Hero Phase, roll a D6. On a 3+, the Aspects have heeded the call, and empower the weapons of the Dragon Blades. Until your next Hero Phase, the rend of this units Drake Lance and Sword becomes -1.

[ReynakZhen]

Could introduce a rule for Cav units that prevent enemy units from running or retreating within a certain distance.

 

 

[Davariel]

My gut feeling is that most cavalry units are poor because they're pointed on the basis of their damage output on the charge, rather than their generally underwhelming contribution otherwise (on par with the basic units they're 40-60 points more expensive than).

As a result, I think the cavalry units that stand out are the ones that buck this trend: e.g. most dracoth cav don't care about being charged or not, kick out lots of mortal wounds, and have an amazing 3+ save. Likewise Grail Knights - arguably the best of the old world cav crowd - remain a decent threat when not charging thanks to rerolls to hit and -1 rend.

Most cavalry simply aren't fast enough in this new world of fast monsters, flyers and movement abilities like Sayl and Destruction allegiance to charge often enough to be worth their points. Recost cav on the basis of their basic stats and treat their charge bonuses as a free extra like unit size bonuses and I think cav would mostly be fine.

That's my 2c, anyway

[aquenaton]

I like that cavalry in AoS now has more wounds that the infantry version or the people. Black knights have 2 wounds in stead of the one of the grave guard. In fantasy, they were more expensive without that buff.

I would like if cavalry had some movement bonus, like run and charge, or 3d6 on charge... something like that, and also agree that they are a bit lackluster if they do not manage to charge.

[someone2040]

14 minutes ago, Davariel said:

My gut feeling is that most cavalry units are poor because they're pointed on the basis of their damage output on the charge, rather than their generally underwhelming contribution otherwise (on par with the basic units they're 40-60 points more expensive than).

As a result, I think the cavalry units that stand out are the ones that buck this trend: e.g. most dracoth cav don't care about being charged or not, kick out lots of mortal wounds, and have an amazing 3+ save. Likewise Grail Knights - arguably the best of the old world cav crowd - remain a decent threat when not charging thanks to rerolls to hit and -1 rend.

Most cavalry simply aren't fast enough in this new world of fast monsters, flyers and movement abilities like Sayl and Destruction allegiance to charge often enough to be worth their points. Recost cav on the basis of their basic stats and treat their charge bonuses as a free extra like unit size bonuses and I think cav would mostly be fine.

That's my 2c, anyway

Spot on basically.

I like to look at them in comparison to 8th edition, and see where the differences lie.

I'd argue, in 8th they actually got a better benefit on the charge than they do in AoS. Lances gave +2 strength, which a lot of the time improved the wound roll by 2 as well as adding 2 rend. In comparison in AoS, most lances only improve the wound roll from 4+ to 3+ (Or if already 3+, generally improve the rend instead) and increase the Damage by 1. Damage isn't as useful if you can't break through the armour.

Additionally, in prior editions it was a lot easier to wipe out units. Send the cavalry in (Maybe with some friends depending on edition), break the opponent on the charge and send them packing. In your follow up turn if you weren't counter-charged, you get to make use of your charge bonus again. So a good general would be getting a lot more use out of their charge bonuses. In AoS, it seems a lot of time you charge in and get bogged down.

I honestly don't know if the double turn helps or hinders this. Like many things, it's a bit divisive. In theory, you could've charged in, get bogged down, then retreat back out and hope for a double turn so you can get your charge bonus again. But if you don't get the double turn, you've just wasted a turn where you could've been punching the enemy. Sadly, I've found most of the time it's better off just to keep your cavalry in combat rather than retreat and try again.

 

Overall, like @Davariel said, it's generally better to purchase Knights that can fight decently enough regardless of the charge, because they put out more consistent damage rather than rely solely on a bonus you get twice~ a battle.

[Oppenheimer]

8 hours ago, Ratatatata said:

Most, if not all, of the typical cavalry units doesn't feel very Age of Sigmar-y for me. I think knights and horses really doesn't suit the high fantasy setting of AoS. Very much do not miss things like the old empire knights or pistoliers or Bretonnia. 

But that's just my opinion, and you're certainly right that cavalry is not very common. 

That's the saddest thing I've read in a while. I really miss the mideval aspects of Warhammer. Luckily, they do actually come up in the fluff still. Flesheater courts for instance think they are knights in shining armour for instance. There were a couple stories in the chaos short story bundle which mentioned valiant knights in it too (although they were defeated by chaos).

[someone2040]

26 minutes ago, Oppenheimer said:

That's the saddest thing I've read in a while. I really miss the mideval aspects of Warhammer. Luckily, they do actually come up in the fluff still. Flesheater courts for instance think they are knights in shining armour for instance. There were a couple stories in the chaos short story bundle which mentioned valiant knights in it too (although they were defeated by chaos).

The quote that really resonates with me and I always remember every time this kind've thing comes up is "If everyone's super... then nobodies super".

If everyone ride around on Dracoths and Juggernaughts and Demigryphs and Gruntas, well... then they're not really that special are they, they're kinda ordinary and regular. But if you've got your regular Humans, riding horses, fighting alongside myths like Stormcast Eternals and Monsters like Griffons and Star Drakes, well, then it puts into perspective about how important and different those things are.

It's why I'm a huge advocate for making sure the legacy races don't just get washed away over time, because the more 'normal' and grounded fantasy races such as the Free Peoples, Dispossessed, Wanderers, Grots and Greenskinz put into perspective how different the Devoted of Sigmar, Fyreslayers, Sylvaneth, Moonclan, Ironjawz/Bonesplitterz are. There's definitely room for more traditional fantasy as well as high fantasy in the realms of Age of Sigmar.

[awcamawn]

9 hours ago, Ratatatata said:

Most, if not all, of the typical cavalry units doesn't feel very Age of Sigmar-y for me. I think knights and horses really doesn't suit the high fantasy setting of AoS. Very much do not miss things like the old empire knights or pistoliers or Bretonnia. 

But that's just my opinion, and you're certainly right that cavalry is not very common. 

I respectfully disagree. The mortal realms are so vast there's plenty of room for both dracoths and horses. Especially when you consider possibilities like a certain valley or region being 'lost in time' or some such, something that could very much happen in the mortal realms. The Varanguard for instance are AoS models that depict chaos champions riding upon what were once mortal horses before they were 'blessed' by the dark powers. And I think potential matchups like Kharadron Overlords facing off against noble Brettonian knights would look really cool on the tabletop and that medieval knights juxtaposed being against steampunk dwarves duardin make it all the more Age of Sigmar-y (and would make for a cool narrative). Basically, I like the idea that anything can happen in the mortal realms, including armies being marshaled that are perhaps more mundane than Stormcast on Chocobos or Tzeentch demons on spiky hoverboards (especially now that humans have set up shop and are making a living across the realms during this new Age of Sigmar). Those relatively more mundane elements showcase just how Age of Sigmar-y the higher fantasy elements are. It doesn't need to be an arms race as to how high fantasy we can be, all day all the time. I would argue that Grail Knights, for example, are very much high fantasy. I can appreciate where you're coming from though, I just think that every model with a warscroll fits in Age of Sigmar just fine because the realms are so large and diverse that practically anything can happen (and that's one of the coolest things about the setting). All just diff'rent strokes though.

[Lecfast]

What made me cringe on first sight of cavalry warscrolls was their saves. AoS cav armor is terrible compared with WHFB. The riders don't do quite as much damage (even on the charge) but they seem to die to a stiff breeze.

[Ollie Grimwood]

I think most cavalry is right where it should in terms of fighting while static. Most need more of a bonus on the charge (Chaos Knights with Glaives or Freepeoples/Aelf Knights are about right).

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

[MrCharisma]

On top of all the love for the old world, I tend to use Prosocutors with javalins in the calavery role. 80pts, high movement, shooting, and generally annoying from a far. 

There is definitely a decreasing in that light calavery troop choice, mostly because they aren't worth the points ATM and I lose synergy too easily. 

[mdkinker]

6 hours ago, MrCharisma said:

On top of all the love for the old world, I tend to use Prosocutors with javalins in the calavery role. 80pts, high movement, shooting, and generally annoying from a far. 

There is definitely a decreasing in that light calavery troop choice, mostly because they aren't worth the points ATM and I lose synergy too easily. 

It seems like battalions are keeping cavalry in the games I play. Hammerstrike (your mention of Prosecutors and synergy made me think of this) and Brass Stampede being the ones I'm thinking of.

 

Edit: To speak to the OP, I like those rules and don't find them to go against the grain of AoS warscrolls, which often share similar rules depending on unit types (if often using different names for narrative traction).

[Tidings]

I feel like main problem with cavalry in AoS is that so many armies can move across the entire table and charge on the first turn. The whole move THEN charge order of operations means that there is less of a "out-maneuver your opponent" phase of the battle, which is really where cavalry had a role. In AoS they are basically reduced to grabbing objectives, which would be fine except they cost more and die to the cheap battleline unit holding said objective. 

You can't make cavalry faster, everyone already moves a bit too fast since they can charge after moving. IMO all the crazy fast moving needs to be toned down for cavalry's movement to feel valuable. That won't happen though.

[inunn]

Cavalry are already used tactically for objective control so I think calvalry could get a more unique feel by having some more tools to help with that. For instance if you had a rule where cavalry charging infantry forced the infantry to scatter (think reverse pile-in) they would have an interesting function. You’d have to get them in to smash the infantry away from the objective then to make best use of them you’d have to tactically retreat and charge them again while positioning your other units into the gap they create.

Just a thought

[someone2040]

9 hours ago, inunn said:

Cavalry are already used tactically for objective control so I think calvalry could get a more unique feel by having some more tools to help with that. For instance if you had a rule where cavalry charging infantry forced the infantry to scatter (think reverse pile-in) they would have an interesting function. You’d have to get them in to smash the infantry away from the objective then to make best use of them you’d have to tactically retreat and charge them again while positioning your other units into the gap they create.

Just a thought

I think in this particular case, scattering as they're run down is reflected both in the ability to retreat and battleshock casualties.

 

In general though, abilities which can force movement of the opponents models I think should be pretty rare, as they could be open to abuse. There's also the fact that there's no such thing as 'Infantry' in the game. There are only Monsters and everything else. So it's hard to make a thematic ruling that makes sense against not only infantry, but all the other non-monsters in the game.

[SpiritofHokuto]

I really like the rule that came out of the fan made Bretonnian battletome Deus Vult.

"On any turn that any mounted unit or character charges, any to-wound roll of 6 or more counts the damage inflicted as Mortal Wounds."

With this proccing on a 5+ and causing 2 MW due to the rules lances generally have it really adds some much needed punch to cavalry without being too overbearing. 

[Killax]

I think one of the most interesting things cavalry presents in other games and not in AoS is 'hit and run' tactics. The ability to get in there and move out.

Now not only from a visual perspective this makes sence but it would also be benificial to them for the simple reason that their "odd" base size actually restricts them quite a lot. From a modellers perspective this is just cool but from a gaming perspective it often means that if they have the same stats as your typical warrior but with only increased Movement you'd still prefer smaller based models in many cases, as attacks make and break the game.

Wyrd approach
There isn't too much cavalry in Malifaux but there is in The Other Side. There the added bonus to Cavalry is often very simple. "Rerolls (flips)" on either movement or charge damage. This could also be something GW might want to consider for their Light cavalry and respectfully Heavy cavalry.

PP approach
A proposal I think is a very interesting concept is one used by Warmachine/Hordes, where Cavalry after their attack/activation moves another 3". This allows you to have specific models stuck in melee in that game and this in turn allows for an improved board control with them. Alternatively you just scoot back 3" with some while others scoot up. Something like that would be interesting to me.

GW approach
Another proposal I wouldn't be against would be to implement the 40K variant of what Calavry does. Making their runs an automatic succesful roll of 6. Better put, at that point Cavalry isn't typically 2-4" faster as infantry but more akin to 6"/ the double. Applying that in my opinion would be GW using it's own great design and truely make Cavalry dangerous again. Not so much in terms of attacks but sheer mobility and thus capturing far away objectives and such.

Cheers,

[Xasz]

The most 'doable' official change would be a point decrease for almost every cav-unit in the game.

The only cav-unit that comes to mind that sees play and seems to be remotely well priced, are bloodknights. Everything else is just lackluster in its weight-class, especially in a game with so many movement spells/tools.

Good thing the GHB 2017 is just around the corner.

#hope?

[SpiritofHokuto]

Hey credit where credit is due. It's one of my favourite fan made rules (and I've seen my fair share over the years).

Handling out Mortal Wound access is a dangerous game that could easily go into the absurd if not handled correctly.

But the hoops you have to jump through (successfully charging, successfully hitting, wound roll of 6+) not only tempers it to a balanced level, but makes thematic sense as well. Sure Bretonnians have ways to somewhat mitigate those hoops, but it's never a guarantee and there's still at least three points at which it can fail. 

You've manged to strike the perfect balance between making a special rule powerful and thematic, but also situational and not automatic. Which is a hard thing to do.

[Aelfric]

It would be nice if cavalry had some rend.  Maybe -1 for every 4 inches charged to reflect the momentum gained over the charge distance.  Just wishful thinking.