Yeah, narratively it is jukes, wiggles and dodges. I'd still prefer it to be WS test, first of all, it is easier to remember (all tests in CC for attacks/defence are done with WS checks) and secondly, WS is ironically an underused stat in a game. Initiative is needed to cross obstacles and retreat from melee, which sems fairly useful.
It's no less used than BS, really. It's just more difficult to get a charge than it is to get a shot.
I brought up the juking stuff to poke fun at what I think is an unintentional consequence of making rules like this. Namely, that you're now compelled to imagine somebody like a 400 pound Goliath dude bobbing and weaving, because he has good WS and A scores.
I interpret WS as somebody's likelihood of sinking a blow, against a variety of fighting styles. Not their overall ability as a duellist (for the reasons alluded to in the previous post).
All of this discussion has actually served to make me appreciate the current melee paradigm a lot more. Particularly when I read this:
Edit: Trust me, I used to think that vanilla melee was serviceabe, until we made getting into close combat easier. Once that happened, our group pretty much united in opinion that GW melee is very unsatisfying to play, simply because we started seeing melee occur much more often.
So you broke the game, to make a gambit that was difficult to achieve, but reliably devastating, easy to achieve. And then said, "Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm
, something so easy to achieve should not be this reliably devastating!" (breaking the game even more deeply, imo).
The standard rules make shooting omnipresent, but quite difficult to actually kill somebody with (between the abundance of cover, the 1/6 chance of rolling an OOA, and pinned models almost always breaking LoS for subsequent shots). And the rules make melee rare, and challenging to set up, but reward doing so with a very high chance of removing a target.
The challenge of locking in a charge is one of the great pleasures of this ruleset, for me, and I don't understand people who don't want to rise to that challenge, and would prefer their model to always have its cake and eat it. The positional counterplay of deploying/choosing routes for melee fighters across the board is one of the more tense, demanding aspects of the game. These house rules make it so you might as well just set up your melee beast directly across from the opponent's melee beast, because a charge is just going to come down to a coinflip.
Can I ask the proponents of contested melee rules why they would not be satisfied with something much less ambitious, that still accounts for a gap in WS scores? Like, say:
When a fighter rolls to hit against an enemy with a WS equal to or greater than their own, they subtract one from their results.
I know I've been very feisty about these rules lately, but I promise it's not personal. If I have time I'm going to try to do an editing pass for you (before returning to my crusade resisting the implementation of these rules
). Your English is excellent, though, and most of the errors are just dropped articles (which don't exist at all in Russian, iirc).