Also there are plenty of Ra4+ units, just not hordes.
The trend has very much shifted towards Ra4+ regiments with 18"-24" range and steady aim firing 10 shots. This is what I mean by less shooting, but more reliable.
Buffing the melee capabilities of ranged units isn’t really balancing them, being able to fight a bit better in melee is a bit of a side step. I’d rather not have my Defense 3 Nerve 9/11 units in melee… even if they gain more attacks, or went to Me 4+. They aren’t meant to be in melee, if they are in Melee it means something has gone horribly wrong.
If they have been boosted in Melee why even bother taking them over say Mounted Sargents?
Again, I hope I am wrong, just what I am seeing isn’t filling me with confidence.
2 Likes
That would be a terrible idea because if we let anything like that through I’d be stuck playing against it for however long it took to bring out an FAQ or CoK book! 
1 Like
Again. Thank you!
1 Like
Yeah I don’t disagree with you, I’d rather have 24" range and lesser combat ability. But what I mean is that it has clearly been decided that all mounted shooting units should be 18" range, so at least every unit was given something to make up for the loss in range.
Also as someone who has played with lots of troops of Centaur Bray Hunters, don’t underestimate what a Me4 ranged cavalry troop can do in the flank. They’re certainly not designed for combat but my Centaurs have tipped the odds in more combats than you’d expect.
Cheers for the write up, many good changes to start digesting soon. I will say right now that 3E’s treatment of hills re: cover is pretty much how I always assumed they worked (adding hill height to unit height), but would be constantly corrected. So thanks for matching up with my brain on that one 
2 Likes
Kingdoms of Men shooting was always rather meh. Especially the mounted scouts were one of the better choices as they could move and shoot without penalties.
I do like the ideas for artillery, and hope guns will actually be useful.
The fact that our crossbows and arquebussiers will not be that useful again is maybe something I am willing to sacrifice on the altar of improving our infantry.
On that subject, if I will never have to encounter a ranged 4+/elite/elven archer horde with heart seeking and bane chant, I’d be very happy.
2 Likes
Mantic made some tokens for it in their kit but if you dont trust your opponent or just want to keep track you could mark the tokens or write down which is which secretly.
I believe mantics are 2 sided with a secret side and an up side.
Fyrax’s question was about playing the scenario on UB (= Universal Battle). I do not play on this platform but guess the only option is to trust your opponent there. For standard games played on real board with real miniatures the two-sided tokens seem best.
1 Like
Could you send each other password protected Word document(s)?
just tell your opponent the password(s) at the appropriate time
2 Likes
Yeah, this was my thought for the solution. Still a bit clumsy but definitely a way round it
1 Like
Opps yeah my mistake.
Tailor made for a forum!
Which rule on the rulebook allows that? Had a discussion about It but does not see It.
The upper horde:
see page 24, treatment of hills - as the LP is behind the hill, the terrain piece cannot be ignored, so the unit does not have LOS to the regiment
The bottom regiment:
page 25, drawing LOS, the second paragraph - the upper horde is partially “inside” the hill, so the regiment can draw a LOS to the unit
I am not sure if this is a topic where 3ed rules should be discussed but that’s another matter. 
EDIT: In a way, I agree with @MiSiO_1 that the interaction of units with hills is a bit confusing. I have my own issue with it related to providing cover. I posted about the matter in this topic, Hills and cover in 3ed. I do not think I got a good answer there then. 
1 Like
“Shooting feels like a bit of a different beast in V3. Not necessarily worse, but different”
No, it is definitely worse. You can argue that it was needed, but claiming that shooting isn’t worse is just not true. That being said, it was good to hear from a playtester and some of your clarifications are really helpful, thanks!
I think being within a hill is the key part.
@LunaGuardian interesting as I have more shooting in my lists than ever before.
I suppose lists are different regarding shooting, but with most archers hitting on 5+ saying that shooting didn’t generally speaking take a hit is just not accurate
1 Like
Shooting is definately worse.
That said, it’s also more important than ever. This is that in the current game (in all the single game I played already 
) getting the right combats is extremely important.
The ability to deal with chaff by shooting it is therefore invalueable.
Shooting is more of an aid to your combat units, rather than a game plan on its own.
War machines are more consistent, but less likely to total a unit in a freak turn.
1 Like