https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/01/new-warhammer-40000-charge-phasegw-homepage-post-4/

Terrible

Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

"same as now, add an inch to the charge." Could have made a slightly more interesting article than that.

in theory this is an average charge range of 8" now (7 dice average + the "extra" inch) but I still would have prefered a set charge distance based on the Movement stat. This means a slow-ass model has the exact same charge speed as a fast model. Seems like a missed opportunity to me.

Somehow I get the feeling my world eaters is going to sit out yet another edition.

Yeah, gotta say, after all the good stuff they've been doing, this is probably the most disappointing thing so far. Why couldn't it have just been like AoS? Way simpler and kind of just better IMO.

I actually think the "you cannot move within 1" of an enemy you did not declare as a target of your charge" is the big part of this, you could very easily force units to multi-charge your units, and can also screen much more easily. Unless the means you cannot end your move within 1" it also means models jumping over screens is a thing of the past (unless exceptions are made.)

The only difference between this and AoS is overwatch and having to declare a target ahead of time.

Yeah that's pretty disappointing. Overwatch is a terrible mechanic that needed to go, not be improved, and I'd have preferred something closer to AoS where you roll dice first, then declare target.

Also no mention of whether the effect of charging into terrain remains the same.

 JNAProductions wrote:
The only difference between this and AoS is overwatch and having to declare a target ahead of time.

Yeah I think both of those aren't necessary. It's a lot nicer to roll your charge distance then choose a unit to charge based on that. And overwatch is annoying. Why do you get an additional turn of shooting when you just had your shooting phase? They're little things that I think still make it less fun than the AoS way. I'm an IG player and still think it should've been more freeing. And now being able to overwatch multiple times?
I dunno, just feels a little bit punishing still for Assault armies again. That said, it's still early, so I'll have to wait and see. It's just my pre-conceived ideas, and I'm more than happy to be wrong. Everything else about 8th has me super keen

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

That or just M for charge range. I hope Hormagants for example will get a bonus to the roll. Otherwise they would effectively move slower when charging because they will have like 8"-12" M.

To be fair if I'm reading the article right, it says you move 2D6 towards your target. So I would guess that means even if you "fail" the charge you still move that distance. If that is the case I guess that could be useful for some units instead of just sitting there, as you would then be closer for your next turn ( assuming that unit doesn't die to shooting, but from the earlier article about just moving out of combat I'm assuming it might happen regardless of you getting into melee or not).

Yeah... This is shaping up to be another shooting addition, honestly. Sad panda.

CommissarClay wrote:
To be fair if I'm reading the article right, it says you move 2D6 towards your target. So I would guess that means even if you "fail" the charge you still move that distance. If that is the case I guess that could be useful for some units instead of just sitting there, as you would then be closer for your next turn ( assuming that unit doesn't die to shooting, but from the earlier article about just moving out of combat I'm assuming it might happen regardless of you getting into melee or not).

I'd agree with you but it doesn't point it out as a new feature, so I'm assuming it's just how they wrote it and the actual rule stays the same of staying still if you fail the charge range. It'd certainly be interesting though if you did get to move up to the distance you rolled, even if you don't make it to your target

nordsturmking wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

That or just M for charge range. I hope Hormagants for example will get a bonus to the roll. Otherwise they would effectively move slower when charging because they will have like 8"-12" M.

Yeah, just to have it tied to the movement stat somehow.

Mostly so that you wouldn't need extra rules like fleet, etc.

What this means is "BUY OUR TRANSPORTS!!!"

 JNAProductions wrote:
The only difference between this and AoS is overwatch and having to declare a target ahead of time.

The other difference is the distance. In AoS you can only be a minimum distance of 3" away. In 40k its 1"

On the other hand, AoS doesn't have penalties to charging through terrain unlike 40k where you add 2" so it kinda balances out.

I'd say the biggest change to Overwatch is that you can shoot multiple Overwatches as long as you're not engaged. So charging with your chaff to soak Overwatch, even if they don't make it, wont be as effective.

 alanmckenzie wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

That or just M for charge range. I hope Hormagants for example will get a bonus to the roll. Otherwise they would effectively move slower when charging because they will have like 8"-12" M.

Yeah, just to have it tied to the movement stat somehow.

Mostly so that you wouldn't need extra rules like fleet, etc.

In AoS, if a unit is particularly fast, they get an extra dice or so for their charge distance. If not, re-rolls and things are common or being able to Run (or Advance in this case) and charge in the same turn, that kind of stuff. So I'd expect the same kind of thing for assault based armies in 8th. And the rules will be on their Datasheets (or whatever they'll be called as Warscroll equivalents) specifically, rather than being an extra universal rule to have in the core rules, I'd suspect.

With all the interesting changes being made, this seems stagnant and counterintuitive. I would venture this would be one of the easiest things to fix or adjust. I guess we'll have to see how it fits when all is said and done but as mentioned earlier this seems like a wasted opportunity.

 JNAProductions wrote:
The only difference between this and AoS is overwatch and having to declare a target ahead of time.

Not quite. In AoS, you roll your charge distance before actually selecting any targets (you just need to have an enemy unit within 12"). So you can evaluate the situation after the roll and perhaps go for a closer range target if your distance is not as long as you originally wanted/needed. Moreover, unlike in 40k, AoS charging does not require you to take the shortest possible route either (no mention in this article of whether this is going to be the case for 40k). In AoS, you are free to move your models in the most optimal route for your tactical situation, or control the formation of your charge in order to hit the enemy unit(s) the hardest.

With none of this being mentioned in the article, I'm worried that charging 8th ed 40k is going to be miss out on a lot of the nuance of AoS' maneuvers.

EDIT: If we can roll our charge and THEN decide what to do, that is much better.

I've been very excited about this edition, but random charge rolls are a tax on melee players that is unfair and unfun. Right now, to shoot you have to:

1. Be within range
2. Have LOS
3. Roll to hit
4. Roll to wound
5. Have the wound not saved

To engage in a charge you have to

1. Be within at least 12 inches
2. Survive overwatch
3. Beat a 2D6 range test
4. Get models in contact with other models
5. Roll to hit
6. Roll to wound
7. Have the wound not saved
8. Survive counterattack

It just would be so much nicer if I could KNOW the range of my attack, like a shooting attack. While I recognize that the rewards of a successful charge are potentially greater than a successful shooting attack, they are not THAT much better that I should have to survive 2 versions of a counterattack in the same round to make my attack.

Much of this is speculation: maybe overwatchers can't attack in H2H in 8E, but it doesn't seem that way.

An idea I've heard tossed around is 2d6 charge range, with a minimum equal to your Initiative value. Obviously that wouldn't work without the Initiative stat, but they could do something like that, related to movement probably.

And, to Tiberius, who says some units won't have special abilities letting them charge farther?

 JNAProductions wrote:
An idea I've heard tossed around is 2d6 charge range, with a minimum equal to your Initiative value. Obviously that wouldn't work without the Initiative stat, but they could do something like that, related to movement probably.

And, to Tiberius, who says some units won't have special abilities letting them charge farther?

Wasn't the point of the movement stat being brought back supposed to remove the need for units to have special movement/charge rules?

Honestly, as an assault army players, I like these rules. I don't 'get' why everyone seems so bent out of shape about it. Overwatch is good (and logical). Rolling 2D6 makes sense because this is, after all, a dice game.

I'm all for it. Plus remember, you can assault out of like every transport now.

Audustum wrote:
Honestly, as an assault army players, I like these rules. I don't 'get' why everyone seems so bent out of shape about it. Overwatch is good (and logical). Rolling 2D6 makes sense because this is, after all, a dice game.

I'm all for it. Plus remember, you can assault out of like every transport now.

Where did they say that?

Edit: AoS has a move stat and has special charge rules. Why can't 40k?

Audustum wrote:
Honestly, as an assault army players, I like these rules. I don't 'get' why everyone seems so bent out of shape about it. Overwatch is good (and logical). Rolling 2D6 makes sense because this is, after all, a dice game.

I'm all for it. Plus remember, you can assault out of like every transport now.

I have seen nothing that says you can assault out of any transport.
And everyone hates 2D6 charge because of failing 3" charges (sure it'll be 4" now but still)

Add that the "sacrifice overwatch" tactic of throwing a unit at the enemy first won't be as good with them allowing multiple overwatches if unengaged
I.e the "sacrifice" unit must A) survive and B) get there
While in 7th they just need to be in potential charge range

I believe people were saying that in the...I think it was the 8th Movement Thread? I just took it at face value.

I look at the Charge phase as given and can't help but think there will be myriad rules that allow a unit to do one or more of: reroll charge distance, ignore Overwatch, declare target at over 12" then move the full distance, roll 3D6, etc, etc.

Article could have been summed up in 2 lines

Charge works almost the exact same.
Just need to make it with in an inch, not base to base now.

Would love if they could clarify whether the charging unit gets to move the 2d6" whether or not they rolled high enough to engage. They answered all the whining, but didn't answer that question. Well, we'll find out soon enough. But that's not soon enough!

I was hoping for a Movement + D6" as well, sad to see this not the case. However, notice that it doesn't say that if you fail the charge you don't move. It says you MOVE 2d6"! So even on a failed charge you get closer, and that's pretty awesome.

Agreed that it's shame to see Overwatch get buffed. Was hoping it would go away to save on time. At the very least, getting rid of the "two squad charge 1 target" trick to absorb the Overwatch was something that should've been able to stay.

I very much like that you just need to be within 1". Solves a lot of positioning problems.

Ultimately, it definitely still looks like a shooting edition. Not thrilled about that, but overall these changes are still very good. Maybe next year close combat will get its love! Eternally hopeful.

They removed initiative and added movement

A quick glance on the rules shows we would benefit from initiative and movement is underused (useless in the charge).

Great job, Hack Frauds. As always.

Here is an odd question: Can you force your opponent to have to multi-charge you in order to be able to actually charge you? I will show an example:


X = Tactical Squad Member
D = Devistator Squad Member
A = Assault squad member
0 = Opponents squad


.D..D..D..D..D..
XAXAXAXAXA
.................
.................
.................
O.O.O.O.O

The Opponent cannot charge X or A without being within 1" of either A or X. And if it charges both A and X with one model it will be within an Inch of D.

It wouldn't necessarily be within 1" of D if it charged both X and A - it'll be on the other side of that line from the Devastators.

If you rolled high enough, depending on how coherency works, you could also have each model from O within an inch of a model from either X or A without also being too close to a model from the other unit. But yeah, if your example is something we're able to do with our units, it makes it harder to avoid having to multicharge.

Youn wrote:
Here is an odd question: Can you force your opponent to have to multi-charge you in order to be able to actually charge you? I will show an example:


X = Tactical Squad Member
D = Devistator Squad Member
A = Assault squad member
0 = Opponents squad


.D..D..D..D..D..
XAXAXAXAXA
.................
.................
.................
O.O.O.O.O

The Opponent cannot charge X or A without being within 1" of either A or X. And if it charges both A and X with one model it will be within an Inch of D.

this is assuming we still have 2" coherency where large bases can more easily fit between each other. If it goes down to 1" or if you are not able to get allied units to close to each than it is possible this is not a thing.

However, barring that i could see forcing it, or dependings on how melee attack weapon range works, and how far you can distribute damage into a unit it could be that all the Os could just get in range of one of the Xs and put all thier attacks into the unit that way if melee weapon range works how it does now.

A better image of that would be:



Note: you wouldn't attempt this during any previous edition because templates/blasts would destroy your units. But with templates/blasts gone. This is safe.

I was thinking about a similar thing. I don't think D will be a factor because the charging unit only needs to get within 1" of the front line. Also given that it might be possible to only assault one unit with very careful movement. But that will slow things down quite a bit if it works that way.

You only need to get within an inch of A to complete the charge. So.. you should be able to stay away from T.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Yeah... This is shaping up to be another shooting addition, honestly. Sad panda.

What I'm thinking now. Was really hoping to start Harleys or DE for a more melee oriented army. But I'm still holding out for the full rules and faction rules til I decide or have a firm feeling on things.

From another post i had, I have mixed feelings on this update. Dislike the random charge distances, at least given such a gaping range. Dislike multiple Overwatches (shouldn't it just be one Overwatch per Overwatching model?). Do like the POTENTIAL of a 10-12" charge (even tho I'd still prefer a static distance bonus). Do like the 1" combat range.

Maybe a better "random" charge mechanic would be 2D6 and discard the lowest die roll and add 3"? I dunno, I'm not a game designer. But while I have mixed feelings on the new Charge Phase, I'm still holding overall judgment til final rules are released. I'm too out of touch w/ 6th-7th Ed that I'm not sure how these changes/non-changes really affect units and gameplay, so I'm still gonna hold out til it's all released and I get a better understanding.

Going to depend if units still need 1" between and coherency sizes. You may not be able to mix units like that

Went ahead and asked on the facebook. I have a feeling they just didn't think about the fact we won't have to worry about templates anymore. And you can assume unit cohesion is still 2"

Nothing in any other previous addition prevented a unit from passing through another unit. So, I don't see why you couldn't place models in base to base with your own units. Effectively moving them like WHFB units.

Now, that would be funny if WHFB went to 2" unit cohesion and the most defensive way to play in 40K went to BtB interlocking units.

Youn wrote:
A better image of that would be:

Spoiler:

Note: you wouldn't attempt this during any previous edition because templates/blasts would destroy your units. But with templates/blasts gone. This is safe.

You can definitely charge it, and depending on how charging is worded, you may even be able to charge just units A or just units T or units A&T without charging unit D. This is because you only need to be within 1", not base-to-base, to make attacks. If they say you have to get into base-to-base if possible, then you have to charge all three, but it's okay because either you are or are not within 1 inch of unit D. If you're not within 1", then you don't charge them and you get into base-to-base with units A&T. If they are within 1", then you do charge them and you get into base-to-base with units A&T and within 1" of unit D. If you don't need to move into base-to-base if possible, then you can put your models directly opposite unit T while still being within 1" of unit A. It was previously impossible in this situation to charge A without charging T (and theoretically impossible without also charging unit D), because you'd end up within 1" of them, but if you don't have to be in base-to-base then you can just hang out at the edge of the 1" of just the A's or just the T's.

I like that at least you get to still move the 2d6 even if you failed. I wonder if you will be able to do this even when the unit being charged is out of range to get better positioning or move the way up the board like in warmachine/hordes

sort of rubbed me wrong to say have a 9 inch charge distance roll a 7 and it's like.. we ran 7 but could not quite make that extra 2 inches so re ran back 7 inches again.

tactically you could risk a overwatch for a 2d6 movement then which is quite different from what we have now.

Wouldn't any over watching unit be reduced to the use of only pistols after the first successful charge against them? Its said you can not shoot anything other than pistols within an inch of an enemy. So unit A charges at unit X. Unit X fires over watch. Unit A successfully makes it into combat (within an inch). Unit B then charges Unit X. Unit X is not armed with any pistol weapons and is unable to shoot over watch (Unit A is within one inch).

Does that seem right?

3 things of note:
1) You aren't limited to one Overwatch. Currently, you only get one target. I wonder if the Shooting Phase will be this lax in targetting.

2) They actually called it a Phase. Currently it is a sub-phase.

3) No mention of the bonuses for Charging here or the ramifications of mutli-charging, other than being Overwatched by all parties (even more if the Tau keep their rule).

 Charistoph wrote:
3 things of note:
1) You aren't limited to one Overwatch. Currently, you only get one target. I wonder if the Shooting Phase will be this lax in targetting.

2) They actually called it a Phase. Currently it is a sub-phase.

3) No mention of the bonuses for Charging here or the ramifications of mutli-charging, other than being Overwatched by all parties (even more if the Tau keep their rule).

In regards to #2 - i noticed this as well.

I'm wondering how things will be done in regards to timing.

Like,
Step 0: Use command points, if applicable.
Step 1: Declare all chargers, and their intended targets.
Step 2: Use command points, if applicable.
Step 3: Fire overwatch.
Step 4: Roll for charge distance.
Step 5: Use command points, if applicable.
Step 6: Move units their charge distance.

I know you can only use 1 point per phase - this is why it's important the charge phase is its own phase. You'll be able to use a point here, and then use another one during the assault phase.

We don't know enough to assume this this horrible. If the game phases are - Movement, Psychic, Advancing or charging, Shooting? or some other combination?

We also don't know what special rules units will have on their data sheets. Perhaps some units will negate overwatch, or others will require successful overwatch hits to be rerolled, or extra dice for charge distances.

We don't know how or if a sweeping advance action will work or if its part of the game...

Naaris wrote:
We don't know enough to assume this this horrible. If the game phases are - Movement, Psychic, Advancing or charging, Shooting? or some other combination?

We also don't know what special rules units will have on their data sheets. Perhaps some units will negate overwatch, or others will require successful overwatch hits to be rerolled, or extra dice for charge distances.

We don't know how or if a sweeping advance action will work or if its part of the game...

Why make the whole thing more complicated just so we will accept a game mechanic that no one likes. Random run / charges is not a fun game mechanic for anyone

An important thing to note it that we do not know the Stats for so, so many units. We know that Eldar and Nids will most likely be faster than Marines. Even the infantry could have a much longer threat range than they currently have.
An Eldar for example, my move 7" + 2D6" charge + 1" away. That is 2" closer than they would be in 7th ed.
How many times has a charge missed by 2"? I have seen it happen more than enough times.

That said, Fleet may or may not be a thing anymore, so it may be a wash. And other units like Termies are actually slower, so there is that.

Also important to note is that most weapons are likely to have AP 0, so even Orks will get to make their 6 saves against Bolter Overwatch.

The main point I am trying to make here is that we don't yet have enough info to rage-quit or lament 8th as 'just another shooting edition"

-

Well, it looks like I will probably be house ruling it so run distance is 1/2 Movement and charge is the same as Movement. It removes the stupid random charge rolls, allows the various movement attributes to play their part, and makes for strategic choices instead of luck of the roll.

Of course will need to see how the whole game looks first to know if that is actually functional. But there isn't much reason why it wouldn't be.

I always find it funny how many people hate the 2d6" random charge rule when it is overall a buff over the 5ed 6" charge rule.

It's like people see the word random and just assume its non-functional (despite every other mechanic is always random on some level)

 CrownAxe wrote:
I always find it funny how many people hate the 2d6" random charge rule when it is overall a buff over the 5ed 6" charge rule.

It's like people see the word random and just assume its non-functional (despite every other mechanic is always random on some level)

but you used to be able to run and charge in 5th so as long as you were giving up shooting a charge was d6 run plus 6 so average then was 9.5" average range

 G00fySmiley wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
I always find it funny how many people hate the 2d6" random charge rule when it is overall a buff over the 5ed 6" charge rule.

It's like people see the word random and just assume its non-functional (despite every other mechanic is always random on some level)

but you used to be able to run and charge in 5th so as long as you were giving up shooting a charge was d6 run plus 6 so average then was 9.5" average range

No, if you had the fleet rule you could run and charge. Most units only had the 6" charge

 CrownAxe wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
I always find it funny how many people hate the 2d6" random charge rule when it is overall a buff over the 5ed 6" charge rule.

It's like people see the word random and just assume its non-functional (despite every other mechanic is always random on some level)

but you used to be able to run and charge in 5th so as long as you were giving up shooting a charge was d6 run plus 6 so average then was 9.5" average range

No, if you had the fleet rule you could run and charge. Most units only had the 6" charge

it is possible my old brain is misremembering but I could have sworn my orks were running and charging... or was that just on the waaagghhh.

 G00fySmiley wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
I always find it funny how many people hate the 2d6" random charge rule when it is overall a buff over the 5ed 6" charge rule.

It's like people see the word random and just assume its non-functional (despite every other mechanic is always random on some level)

but you used to be able to run and charge in 5th so as long as you were giving up shooting a charge was d6 run plus 6 so average then was 9.5" average range

No, if you had the fleet rule you could run and charge. Most units only had the 6" charge

it is possible my old brain is misremembering but I could have sworn my orks were running and charging... or was that just on the waaagghhh.

Waaagh use to give fleet so that is what you were remembering

 CrownAxe wrote:
I always find it funny how many people hate the 2d6" random charge rule when it is overall a buff over the 5ed 6" charge rule.

It's like people see the word random and just assume its non-functional (despite every other mechanic is always random on some level)

You want it random, so people can't move exactly 12.5 inches away from your units and know they won't get charged.

It creates a risk of getting too close.

CommissarClay wrote:
To be fair if I'm reading the article right, it says you move 2D6 towards your target. So I would guess that means even if you "fail" the charge you still move that distance. If that is the case I guess that could be useful for some units instead of just sitting there, as you would then be closer for your next turn ( assuming that unit doesn't die to shooting, but from the earlier article about just moving out of combat I'm assuming it might happen regardless of you getting into melee or not).

Yup... my maulerfiends LLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOVEE this!

...and I imagine any CC oriented units as well... the worst that happens is that you still get your move.

That's a bonus over 7ed.

It's fine to have some randomness and some rolls. When you shoot you get into range, you roll to hit and you roll to wound.

When you assault you roll to get into range, roll to hit, and then roll to wound.

It's an extra bit of randomness before you get to even attempt to do anything. Having an entire unit's effectiveness canceled out entirely because you couldn't roll high enough to get into range is crap.

I think overwatch should have only been available if you were already shooting at the unit charging you, then it could represent you emptying the rest of your ammunition and you preparing for them to reach you as they close the distance.

Its the exact same way with psychic powers. You do all the same things except with the extra randomness of the psychic test. Except you don't see people go "oh psykers are so bad because they have a 1/6 chance of nothing happening"

Not only that but you gained the ability to charge 7-12" instead of effectively auto failing the charge if they are 6.1" away

 Lance845 wrote:
It's an extra bit of randomness before you get to even attempt to do anything. Having an entire unit's effectiveness canceled out entirely because you couldn't roll high enough to get into range is crap.

You get an extra inch... ISN'T THAT ENOUGH!!?!!!?!

The not within 1" of a unit your not charging is the problem. Got 5 tac squads, just mix them up as one big blob on the table. Enemy wants to charge you, well they will have to charge all 5 units and take Overwatch from 50 guys.

And 40k has just become the big blob in the middle every game of AoS I've ever seen in progress is.

 Tamereth wrote:
The not within 1" of a unit your not charging is the problem. Got 5 tac squads, just mix them up as one big blob on the table. Enemy wants to charge you, well they will have to charge all 5 units and take Overwatch from 50 guys.

And 40k has just become the big blob in the middle every game of AoS I've ever seen in progress is.

Unless that rule applies to friendly units too.

I still hate the random charge ranges. I actually almost failed a 1" charge once. (Difficult terrain, rolled a 1 and a 2)

 Tamereth wrote:
The not within 1" of a unit your not charging is the problem. Got 5 tac squads, just mix them up as one big blob on the table. Enemy wants to charge you, well they will have to charge all 5 units and take Overwatch from 50 guys.

And 40k has just become the big blob in the middle every game of AoS I've ever seen in progress is.

Ah, the old 'checkerered formation means everyone has cover saves in the open'.....

Nice try

 Tamereth wrote:
The not within 1" of a unit your not charging is the problem. Got 5 tac squads, just mix them up as one big blob on the table. Enemy wants to charge you, well they will have to charge all 5 units and take Overwatch from 50 guys.

And 40k has just become the big blob in the middle every game of AoS I've ever seen in progress is.

Ok, and in that ridiculous example of 50 tac marines:

100 shots, assuming all rapid fire range.
Expected 16.67 hits
Wounding on 4s - 8.34 wounds.
Wounding on 5s - 5.56 wounds.
Wounding on 6s - 2.78 wounds.

So yeah, if you devote half your list to TAC squads, and throw them into the middle of the map, and they all magically get to rapid fire every overwatch, you will have some difficulty charging into that blob if you have a toughness less than 5, or a save worse than 3, and only 1 wound per model.

Of course ignoring that: (a) they won't all rapid fire, and (b) if you charge FIFTY marines, you will still MOST LIKELY BE OK!

Jbz` wrote:
I still hate the random charge ranges. I actually almost failed a 1" charge once. (Difficult terrain, rolled a 1 and a 2)

That's the negativity bias in action

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

That is a pretty severe constraint on how fast they can make models. A model with a 10 inch movement is going deployment to deployment on a 3+ and every inch of movement increases that range by 2 inches.

People who parrot things like this never really bother to think about what you lose so that whatever 'favorite unit' you're imagining gets to do X cool thing consistently. 2D6 is fine, it creates a better space for them to work in when making the new dataslates.

Just to reiterate, a unit of thunderwolves assuming they keep their current movement are guaranteed to charge 26" every turn without a roll in the proposed system.

Problem is that if you're relying on 12" charges you're already in trouble, where as the threat of a 2" charge roll is always hanging over your head.

If they wanted to keep that element of randomness they could have made it M+1d6, since at least that's SOME level of reliability.

Or they could have, idk, removed pre-measuring if they didn't want people moving 12.1 inches away from assault units.

Every other reveal I was either okay with or at least willing to give a shot up to this point. This is just a straight up disappointment.

You do not know how your command points will influence charging yet. Since it is now its own phase, you will get to spend a command point here, and another during assault itself.

If anything, melee is going to be way too strong in this release.

 Marmatag wrote:
You do not know how your command points will influence charging yet. Since it is now its own phase, you will get to spend a command point here, and another during assault itself.

If anything, melee is going to be way too strong in this release.

Or it was a misspeak. There are plenty of times where they report one thing, and it ends up being another.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
You do not know how your command points will influence charging yet. Since it is now its own phase, you will get to spend a command point here, and another during assault itself.

If anything, melee is going to be way too strong in this release.

Or it was a misspeak. There are plenty of times where they report one thing, and it ends up being another.

Fair.

But "social media updates as written," you would get a command point here in addition to the other phases.

 alanmckenzie wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

That or just M for charge range. I hope Hormagants for example will get a bonus to the roll. Otherwise they would effectively move slower when charging because they will have like 8"-12" M.

Yeah, just to have it tied to the movement stat somehow.

Mostly so that you wouldn't need extra rules like fleet, etc.

Just to pile in, this is a disappointment for me, too. M for movement phase, 2xM for charging would even work in my book.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
You do not know how your command points will influence charging yet. Since it is now its own phase, you will get to spend a command point here, and another during assault itself.

If anything, melee is going to be way too strong in this release.

Or it was a misspeak. There are plenty of times where they report one thing, and it ends up being another.

Fair.

But "social media updates as written," you would get a command point here in addition to the other phases.

True, but Charging may be part of the Assault phase entire, so using such a Command Point would entail greater risk/reward calculations.

Heck, maybe defensive or assault grenades will help out. Who can say?

 Charistoph wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
You do not know how your command points will influence charging yet. Since it is now its own phase, you will get to spend a command point here, and another during assault itself.

If anything, melee is going to be way too strong in this release.

Or it was a misspeak. There are plenty of times where they report one thing, and it ends up being another.

Fair.

But "social media updates as written," you would get a command point here in addition to the other phases.

True, but Charging may be part of the Assault phase entire, so using such a Command Point would entail greater risk/reward calculations.

Heck, maybe defensive or assault grenades will help out. Who can say?

It would be neat if assault grenades granted you an extra inch, and defensive grenades subtracted it.

Failing a charge is so frustrating, when you expect or need to make it. Offering the option for command points here would be cool. Maybe not to guarantee a charge, but to add 2 inches or something to the distance rolled.

 Marmatag wrote:
Failing a charge is so frustrating, when you expect or need to make it. Offering the option for command points here would be cool. Maybe not to guarantee a charge, but to add 2 inches or something to the distance rolled.

No argument there. I would like a little randomness involved for excitement, but I like stability, too. When Fantasy went from 2M to M+2D6" for the Charge, it was a mistake. At best, either M+D6" or 2M+D6" would have been the better call. Heck, even 2M+D3" would have been better than that ridiculousness. In 40K, I would actually prefer a M+D3. Enough to be reliable and you can sink it, but enough randomness to make a long shot tempting.

Dwarfs went from Charging 6" to 15" in Fantasy. I'd like to know what Whiskey they were using to Tango that Foxtrot.

Dunno if i saw it or not but was there any limitation for charging after advancing?

 Desubot wrote:
Dunno if i saw it or not but was there any limitation for charging after advancing?

I think that was mentioned when they went over Advancing.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Dunno if i saw it or not but was there any limitation for charging after advancing?

I think that was mentioned when they went over Advancing.

just checked it only mentioned at the expense of shooting. charging may potentially be 3d6 now which is awesome.

and depending on how transportation works might even be WAY better.

I know there is a lot of talk about random charging being bad, but the way I see it is that having a random charge distance is what allows pre-measuring (in a way)

I started 40k/Fantasy in editions that disallowed pre-measuring and it sucked. You had players that became really good at judging distances and therefore had a distinct advantage. And even worse, it often encouraged "cheating", or at the very least created opportunities to argue that other players may be cheating.

Random charges allow GW to keep the risk/reward aspect of charging while also allowing pre-measuring.

However, I will agree that M + D6" would have made the most sense over 2D6", I can at least see how 2D6" is more fair.
Lets pretend for Example:
Orks are M5". That gives them 5+5+D6", or 16" the can move + charge in a turn.
Eldar might be 7", so 7+7+D6" or 20" max.

That would give Eldar a distinct 4" average advantage over Ork, meaning they will almost always get the charge and thus go first. This may be 'fluffy' but it isn't balanced, or fun for the Ork player who most likely relies more on assault than the Eldar.
However if both only roll 2D6", that comes out to only a 2" difference which should have as dramatic an effect.

----------
Also, I hope that "failed" charges do not FORCE you to move forward. I see a lot of people in this thread saying this is good for the assault unit 'to get closer, at least". but that is actually very bad.
Being forced to be closer means enemy units can just shoot you with more guns/rapid fire, etc.
Sure they will be able to do this be falling back out of combat anyway, but at least that forfeits one of their units.
Failing a charge and still moving forward will mean giving them your unit on a silver platter.

-

I feel like I am missing something here. Anyone else worried this is going to turn into another Tau edition?

No more restrictions on overwatch means no one is going to get close to fire warrior/suit armies. Gonna be just Tau on the Table again and that most certainly is not fun.

Rickels wrote:
I feel like I am missing something here. Anyone else worried this is going to turn into another Tau edition?

No more restrictions on overwatch means no one is going to get close to fire warrior/suit armies. Gonna be just Tau on the Table again and that most certainly is not fun.

It all assumes tau still get a lot of there bonuses still. its entirely possible they are going to tweak support fire.

Rickels wrote:
I feel like I am missing something here. Anyone else worried this is going to turn into another Tau edition?

No more restrictions on overwatch means no one is going to get close to fire warrior/suit armies. Gonna be just Tau on the Table again and that most certainly is not fun.

I read a reply by GW on their Facebook post for this. Someone had a similar concern that gunline armies would just dominiate.
GW replied by saying to wait until tomorrow when they go over the Assault phase and I am paraphrasing, but "gunline armies will be a bad idea"

Speculation: This makes me thing that units will be able to pile-in and engage further units I the same turn. So you can have a tough/fast unit hit your lines and just plow through the enemy army in 1 turn. This could be why you get unlimited Overwatch to mitigate that.

-

 Galef wrote:

Rickels wrote:
I feel like I am missing something here. Anyone else worried this is going to turn into another Tau edition?

No more restrictions on overwatch means no one is going to get close to fire warrior/suit armies. Gonna be just Tau on the Table again and that most certainly is not fun.

I read a reply by GW on their Facebook post for this. Someone had a similar concern that gunline armies would just dominiate.
GW replied by saying to wait until tomorrow when they go over the Assault phase and I am paraphrasing, but "gunline armies will be a bad idea"

Speculation: This makes me thing that units will be able to pile-in and engage further units I the same turn. So you can have a tough/fast unit hit your lines and just plow through the enemy army in 1 turn. This could be why you get unlimited Overwatch to mitigate that.

-

Also not sure if model removing will be from the front anymore, AND with many models potentially getting multi wounds, its going to get harder to kill off certain units quickly before assault. me thinks its going to be interesting.

 Galef wrote:

Rickels wrote:
I feel like I am missing something here. Anyone else worried this is going to turn into another Tau edition?

No more restrictions on overwatch means no one is going to get close to fire warrior/suit armies. Gonna be just Tau on the Table again and that most certainly is not fun.

I read a reply by GW on their Facebook post for this. Someone had a similar concern that gunline armies would just dominiate.
GW replied by saying to wait until tomorrow when they go over the Assault phase and I am paraphrasing, but "gunline armies will be a bad idea"

Speculation: This makes me thing that units will be able to pile-in and engage further units I the same turn. So you can have a tough/fast unit hit your lines and just plow through the enemy army in 1 turn. This could be why you get unlimited Overwatch to mitigate that.

-

Or if you sweep one unit you can immediately make a charge against another.

Wow we get an extra inch, lets drink to that

alex0911 wrote:
Wow we get an extra inch, lets drink to that

Depending on your units it may be more than an inch, or less.

Terminators only have a 5" move, so that extra inch is basically lost in their movement phase.
Eldar and Tyranids will likely have 7+" moves and will thus get even more than 1" overall.

Either way, I'm excited.

Funny enough my GF keeps telling me that it would be nice if I had an extra inch....

Plz don't make such off topic jokes.

So much of this depends on stuff we don't know. Let's just w8 and see I guess.

Earth127 wrote:
Plz don't make such off topic jokes.

So much of this depends on stuff we don't know. Let's just w8 and see I guess.

I was kidding... Didn't mean to hurt you...

 kronk wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:

nordsturmking wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

That or just M for charge range. I hope Hormagants for example will get a bonus to the roll. Otherwise they would effectively move slower when charging because they will have like 8"-12" M.

Yeah, just to have it tied to the movement stat somehow.

Mostly so that you wouldn't need extra rules like fleet, etc.

Just to pile in, this is a disappointment for me, too. M for movement phase, 2xM for charging would even work in my book.

Exactly.

Be reasonable; 2xM for change would make this game pointless. You'd literally be charging from out of overwatch range for almost all the guns except a few heavies.

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

i like that but why did they not do it?

 Galef wrote:

Also, I hope that "failed" charges do not FORCE you to move forward. I see a lot of people in this thread saying this is good for the assault unit 'to get closer, at least". but that is actually very bad.
Being forced to be closer means enemy units can just shoot you with more guns/rapid fire, etc.
Sure they will be able to do this be falling back out of combat anyway, but at least that forfeits one of their units.
Failing a charge and still moving forward will mean giving them your unit on a silver platter.

-

I certainly hope it's voluntary too... it should be similar to 7ed run move instead.

However, if true, it'll force your opponent to deal with your unit or expect some crumping on your next turn. That, in itself, is another tactic worth thinking about.

 Galef wrote:


That would give Eldar a distinct 4" average advantage over Ork, meaning they will almost always get the charge and thus go first. This may be 'fluffy' but it isn't balanced, or fun for the Ork player who most likely relies more on assault than the Eldar.
However if both only roll 2D6", that comes out to only a 2" difference which should have as dramatic an effect.

As if the Eldar pays more that movement in points and is less resilient to small arms fire.
But that would be crazy, right?

 Galef wrote:
I
"gunline armies will be a bad idea"

Speculation: This makes me thing that units will be able to pile-in and engage further units I the same turn. So you can have a tough/fast unit hit your lines and just plow through the enemy army in 1 turn. This could be why you get unlimited Overwatch to mitigate that.

-

Mhmm, I was looking for a reason to play my Krieg list more oftern, as I have been playing my Scions more than the Kriegers, welp.

Can't wait to get my entire army get run over by a unit or two.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Galef wrote:


That would give Eldar a distinct 4" average advantage over Ork, meaning they will almost always get the charge and thus go first. This may be 'fluffy' but it isn't balanced, or fun for the Ork player who most likely relies more on assault than the Eldar.
However if both only roll 2D6", that comes out to only a 2" difference which should have as dramatic an effect.

As if the Eldar pays more that movement in points and is less resilient to small arms fire.
But that would be crazy, right?

Not as crazy, apparently, as Orks actually standing a chance against Eldar in 8th edition...

In the current edition match up scatterlaser windriders vs boyz. They'll never even sniff melee combat.

They didn't mention charging the unit you shot at.
Could this mean that obliterating a unit in the way means the next unit in range is fair game for a charge?
Dare I hope?

 Galef wrote:

Rickels wrote:
I feel like I am missing something here. Anyone else worried this is going to turn into another Tau edition?

No more restrictions on overwatch means no one is going to get close to fire warrior/suit armies. Gonna be just Tau on the Table again and that most certainly is not fun.

I read a reply by GW on their Facebook post for this. Someone had a similar concern that gunline armies would just dominiate.
GW replied by saying to wait until tomorrow when they go over the Assault phase and I am paraphrasing, but "gunline armies will be a bad idea"

Speculation: This makes me thing that units will be able to pile-in and engage further units I the same turn. So you can have a tough/fast unit hit your lines and just plow through the enemy army in 1 turn. This could be why you get unlimited Overwatch to mitigate that.

-

they have no idea what played game is, that is the problem when/if they play test they never face the things you then find when you play...cmon guys you should know GW, they are like kids play at their homes, they know just nothing of real played wh40k, so what they say is worth like a fart in the wind..

 blackmage wrote:

they have no idea what played game is, that is the problem when/if they play test they never face the things you then find when you play...cmon guys you should know GW, they are like kids play at their homes, they know just nothing of real played wh40k, so what they say is worth like a fart in the wind..

Did you miss the fact that pulled in TOs and other people to playtest this, or are you disregarding that fact?

 3orangewhips wrote:

 blackmage wrote:

they have no idea what played game is, that is the problem when/if they play test they never face the things you then find when you play...cmon guys you should know GW, they are like kids play at their homes, they know just nothing of real played wh40k, so what they say is worth like a fart in the wind..

Did you miss the fact that pulled in TOs and other people to playtest this, or are you disregarding that fact?

We dont even know what the armies will actually look like. in the context of broken 7th edition yeah these new rules look bonkers but we simply dont know whats going to happen.

 kronk wrote:
Just to pile in, this is a disappointment for me, too. M for movement phase, 2xM for charging would even work in my book.

Thundercav deploy on the line, move 12, charge 24. Hope you like playing hammer and anvil 'cause that's literally the only way that you wouldn't get charged turn 1 every single game.

This is one of the reasons why GW shouldn't listen to their fans.

I think a big thing that effects how much of change this is,is wound allocation.

If you can allocate hits to any model, not the closest first, then I really don't have a problem with this, as it strikes a nice balance of letting units that focus on shooting whittle down melee opponents before they can close in, while still letting melee units get a charge in.

The multiple overwatch thing makes sense in this context as well, as it makes suicide charging units with only one or two models in much riskier as they could very well bite the dust and still let the defenders overwatch, whereas as now you can send a single grot in a charge,knowing that there's a very good chance to prevent the target meaningfully overwatching at all.

If hit allocation stays the same, I'm less sold on the idea...

 Drasius wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Just to pile in, this is a disappointment for me, too. M for movement phase, 2xM for charging would even work in my book.

Thundercav deploy on the line, move 12, charge 24. Hope you like playing hammer and anvil 'cause that's literally the only way that you wouldn't get charged turn 1 every single game.

This is one of the reasons why GW shouldn't listen to their fans.

It's actually longer than that because you finish within 1 inch so 25" And yeah, people get so focused in on eliminating random(which is a bit of a non-starter in a dice game) that they stop thinking about the implications of not only units other than whatever favorite unit they're REALLY writing rules for, but even what COULD be made in the future.

Tying charging to the move stat(at least in all the ways suggested here) would hamstring their ability to make 'fast' units because for every additional inch of movement a model gets it actually moves 2(or 3 or 40 based on some of the suggestions put forward) inches faster.

 Drasius wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Just to pile in, this is a disappointment for me, too. M for movement phase, 2xM for charging would even work in my book.

Thundercav deploy on the line, move 12, charge 24. Hope you like playing hammer and anvil 'cause that's literally the only way that you wouldn't get charged turn 1 every single game.

This is one of the reasons why GW shouldn't listen to their fans.

They already can make first turn charges, Deathpack + Murderpack, funnily enough there's still more terrifying things than a first turn TWC assault.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Drasius wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Just to pile in, this is a disappointment for me, too. M for movement phase, 2xM for charging would even work in my book.

Thundercav deploy on the line, move 12, charge 24. Hope you like playing hammer and anvil 'cause that's literally the only way that you wouldn't get charged turn 1 every single game.

This is one of the reasons why GW shouldn't listen to their fans.

They already can make first turn charges, Deathpack + Murderpack, funnily enough there's still more terrifying things than a first turn TWC assault.

But that's a guaranteed, completely idiot proof charge that cannot be stopped or avoided or failed in any way and that requires nothing more than the unit at hand. Oh, is the murderpack crazy? Now imagine the muder pack, except double the range it can charge and take away any chance to fail and that's what's being suggested. And not being as bad a 7th is not enough to be a complement.

People are going out of their way to try and make 8th worse than 7th and I have never had a more heartfelt understanding for why they ignored their community for all these years.

First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Put me down in the "I prefer reliability over randomness in the balance between the two" camp. Tau may not assault much (aside from the occasional Shotgun Stormsurge Stompin'), but we do tend to have a heckuva lot of jump jet battlesuits, and though getting the occasional 12" scoot-away-from-the-approaching-melee-deathball is nice to have, I really would prefer to have kept the reliable 6".

That said, randomness has its place IMO, and being forced to adapt to unfortunate evolving circumstances can make for some entertaining moments. Without randomness, my wrecked Hammerhead's Gun Drones could never in a million years have killed a 4th edition Fateweaver in CC...

My personal preference (probably going to be unpopular for some, given the slightly-more-complicated nature of rolling a d3, and consequently not-so-attractive to GW and their push towards simplification) would be to move towards something like:

Half-Move rounded up +2d3.

For your average (5" to 6") Movement stat models, you're looking at charges that, on average, are equal in speed to the current 2d6 (5 or 6 divided by 2 rounded up = 3, average of 1d3 = 2, so 3 + 2x2 = 7; compared to average of 1d6 = 3.5, so 2x3.5 = 7). But instead of the miserly minimum of 2" and the masterful maximum of 12", you end up with a much more reasonable range of 5" to 9" in which the majority of rolls will end up at 7".

Eldar (rumored to be 7") would be 6" to 10" on the charge, averaging 8". Respectable.

Take something like a hypothetical Thundercav's movement (12"), and you're seeing a minimum of 8" and a maximum of 12" for the charge, with a happy little average of 10" on the charge.

Better than they are now, but still not quite as bad as a guaranteed 24+1"/36+1" charge, nor as unreliable as a 14-24+1" charge.

Being a Tau player, I'd want something similar for my Battlesuit's Jump Jet movement, of course...



Speaking of being a Tau player, and acknowledging (for both good and ill) that there's a LOT that hasn't been revealed that can (and per GW's facebook, will) make assault more effective in 8th edition...

Man, I'm really, REALLY liking the fact that the Tau can actually pull off Kauyon-esque maneuvers now in the way they're intended. Dangle juicy targets in the front, reel them into assaulting (and thereby separating themselves from their allies), pour overwatch into the assaulting unit, and if the bait survives... withdraw back during my own turn to expose the enemy to the trap I've laid.

Do not doubt that I don't want my army to be broken (I'm rooting for the sort of assault rules that would balance well against the Tau), but it'll be nice for the Tau to finally have a way to execute their fluff tactics in game that don't involve cursing the inclusion of Defensive Grenades because the enemy assaulting unit might not wipe my bait unit out.

Do we even know that charging is separate from the movement phase in 8th? I don't really understand why they're distinct in 7th. Almost every game I play, including WFB, treats movement phases as, well, the movement phase where units move.

If charging happened in the movement phase so that charging was the only movement a unit performed we could all be happy with movement plus a d6 or doubled for a charge.

 Galas wrote:
First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Only if you put no thought into tactics before deploying.
There's a simple consideration that stops the fastest and even the meanest melee unit cold - the game is a maximum of seven turns.
A smart player sets up terrain and his/her units so any melee unit can kill a maximum of one unit per turn. How many places can a Deathstar be at once?

Audustum wrote:
Honestly, as an assault army players, I like these rules. I don't 'get' why everyone seems so bent out of shape about it. Overwatch is good (and logical). Rolling 2D6 makes sense because this is, after all, a dice game.

I'm all for it. Plus remember, you can assault out of like every transport now.

I keep hearing people say this and I keep asking them to please tell me where Warhammer community said that, because I have been following them fervently and I have read no such things. And people just keep saying its on the website, but I can't find it, so I'm assuming it is a false rumor.

I hate to bring up real life, but how many out there have charged at an apposing force in full combat gear.

I have, 65lbs of Armor, Shield and Sword. I have been in the armor and stood on the side as a Marshal. If you charge a shield wall multiple times with multiple combatants on your side (Like what happens at Wars) and try to keep cohesion you move at the movement rate of the slowest member of your squad and sometimes you have slow people, small divots caused by rodents, casualties from bow fire and even in response to your opponents defensive posture. A lot of the time it is not the same person with each 'Charge' that is the slow one. I know that I have been the one in the front waiting on the others and the one holding everyone back. Assault is about Timing and then impact.

If you all just Charge as individuals, you die in their spears, one at a time. Well trained Soldiers would make sure they work as a group, so they will move as a Unit.

 Tsol wrote:

Audustum wrote:
Honestly, as an assault army players, I like these rules. I don't 'get' why everyone seems so bent out of shape about it. Overwatch is good (and logical). Rolling 2D6 makes sense because this is, after all, a dice game.

I'm all for it. Plus remember, you can assault out of like every transport now.

I keep hearing people say this and I keep asking them to please tell me where Warhammer community said that, because I have been following them fervently and I have read no such things. And people just keep saying its on the website, but I can't find it, so I'm assuming it is a false rumor.

They showed a statline for a Dreadnought with wounds, toughness and saves instead of AV and Hull Points and underneath it confirmed that AV was gone.

...Huh. I just realized something having to do with Overwatch and Template weapons.

Template weapons now have a range. Template weapons now have a RANGE. That means they may not be able to fire in Overwatch at all if you charge from outside of 8" range.

My dream of a 9 man dual-flamer crisis suit squad hopping around and firing Overwatch after Overwatch while laughing maniacally is destroyed before it ever had a chance to live... Dang.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
They showed a statline for a Dreadnought with wounds, toughness and saves instead of AV and Hull Points and underneath it confirmed that AV was gone.

I would say it doesn't 100% confirm Vehicle AV is gone. It just confirms that Dreadnoughts have been made into normal statlines.

Tho, when you think about it... Dreadnoughts (and other Walkers) were never REALLY Vehicles. Until we see a normal Vehicle, it might not be 100% confirmed.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
...Huh. I just realized something having to do with Overwatch and Template weapons.

Template weapons now have a range. Template weapons now have a RANGE. That means they may not be able to fire in Overwatch at all if you charge from outside of 8" range.

My dream of a 9 man dual-flamer crisis suit squad hopping around and firing Overwatch after Overwatch while laughing maniacally is destroyed before it ever had a chance to live... Dang.

8 is still pretty far for a charge. Especially with difterrain giving an extra -2. It's like 1/9 chance of success.

 koooaei wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
...Huh. I just realized something having to do with Overwatch and Template weapons.

Template weapons now have a range. Template weapons now have a RANGE. That means they may not be able to fire in Overwatch at all if you charge from outside of 8" range.

My dream of a 9 man dual-flamer crisis suit squad hopping around and firing Overwatch after Overwatch while laughing maniacally is destroyed before it ever had a chance to live... Dang.

8 is still pretty far for a charge. Especially with difterrain giving an extra -2. It's like 1/9 chance of success.

True, though I'd be absolutely surprised if bespoke rules didn't include ways to make an 8" charge more reliable.

Also, as a Tau player, I was referencing Supporting Fire, which can leave the supporting Overwatch unit anywhere from an inch to 6 inches (or 12 with the right formation) away from the unit being assault.

In AoS does a victorious unit get any kind of bonus move for wiping out an enemy unit in assault?

I am wondering if the reason for the multiple over watch and the random charge distance is that units in 40k will be able to make a bonus move of some kind and rush out of one successful assault into a fresh combat. That GW are trying to balance that out.

I am scratching my head at the prohibition on moving within one inch of an enemy you aren't assaultin. Didn't we have that a couple of editions ago and it was found to be exploitable?

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
...Huh. I just realized something having to do with Overwatch and Template weapons.

Template weapons now have a range. Template weapons now have a RANGE. That means they may not be able to fire in Overwatch at all if you charge from outside of 8" range.

My dream of a 9 man dual-flamer crisis suit squad hopping around and firing Overwatch after Overwatch while laughing maniacally is destroyed before it ever had a chance to live... Dang.

8 is still pretty far for a charge. Especially with difterrain giving an extra -2. It's like 1/9 chance of success.

True, though I'd be absolutely surprised if bespoke rules didn't include ways to make an 8" charge more reliable.

Also, as a Tau player, I was referencing Supporting Fire, which can leave the supporting Overwatch unit anywhere from an inch to 6 inches (or 12 with the right formation) away from the unit being assault.

Well, if you think about it. It would need to be a 9" charge, since if you're 8" then I'm setting you on fire.

However, that then assumes I'm placing my Flamers in the front. Which means you could have just shot them before the assault regardless.

I do think it will be an interesting dilemma, but it makes sense not to want to run directly into a unit with 10 flamethrowers creating a death wall of fire.

 Galef wrote:

Rickels wrote:
I feel like I am missing something here. Anyone else worried this is going to turn into another Tau edition?

No more restrictions on overwatch means no one is going to get close to fire warrior/suit armies. Gonna be just Tau on the Table again and that most certainly is not fun.

I read a reply by GW on their Facebook post for this. Someone had a similar concern that gunline armies would just dominiate.
GW replied by saying to wait until tomorrow when they go over the Assault phase and I am paraphrasing, but "gunline armies will be a bad idea"

Speculation: This makes me thing that units will be able to pile-in and engage further units I the same turn. So you can have a tough/fast unit hit your lines and just plow through the enemy army in 1 turn. This could be why you get unlimited Overwatch to mitigate that.

-

In practice only one extra unit taken out of shooting for a turn. You kill unit, you engage another, another unit retreats exposing your unit to shooting. Shooty armies would have layered lines to minimize amount of damage you can do assuming you succeed in consolidiating into another unit(likely another random distance roll)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:
Just to pile in, this is a disappointment for me, too. M for movement phase, 2xM for charging would even work in my book.

So total of 3M if you charge for turn? Too long quaranteed move.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Galas wrote:
First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Only if you put no thought into tactics before deploying.
There's a simple consideration that stops the fastest and even the meanest melee unit cold - the game is a maximum of seven turns.
A smart player sets up terrain and his/her units so any melee unit can kill a maximum of one unit per turn. How many places can a Deathstar be at once?

3 TWC is not much of a death star and terrain etc doesn't really matter much as protection when you charge 37" pulping down shooty army unit without effort(sure 3 TWC isn't much of a monster unit. But beats anything shooty units generally offer).

37" quaranteed charge is "bit" extreme.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Tsol wrote:

Audustum wrote:
Honestly, as an assault army players, I like these rules. I don't 'get' why everyone seems so bent out of shape about it. Overwatch is good (and logical). Rolling 2D6 makes sense because this is, after all, a dice game.

I'm all for it. Plus remember, you can assault out of like every transport now.

I keep hearing people say this and I keep asking them to please tell me where Warhammer community said that, because I have been following them fervently and I have read no such things. And people just keep saying its on the website, but I can't find it, so I'm assuming it is a false rumor.

They showed a statline for a Dreadnought with wounds, toughness and saves instead of AV and Hull Points and underneath it confirmed that AV was gone.

I think he's referring to I'm all for it. Plus remember, you can assault out of like every transport now.

Wounds, toughness etc dont' funnily enough mean you can charge out of rhino any more than in 7th ed. Last time I checked that is not feature of having AV rather than T&W...

Correct me if i'm wrong.

But.

You can select any unit within 12″ as the target of your charge, and your units will move towards them 2D6″.

The word 'move' would appear to indicate that the models relocate even in the case of a failed charge.

This would be a Big Deal, and i'm 100% behind it.

tneva82 wrote:

 Galef wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Galas wrote:
First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Only if you put no thought into tactics before deploying.
There's a simple consideration that stops the fastest and even the meanest melee unit cold - the game is a maximum of seven turns.
A smart player sets up terrain and his/her units so any melee unit can kill a maximum of one unit per turn. How many places can a Deathstar be at once?

3 TWC is not much of a death star and terrain etc doesn't really matter much as protection when you charge 37" pulping down shooty army unit without effort(sure 3 TWC isn't much of a monster unit. But beats anything shooty units generally offer).

37" quaranteed charge is "bit" extreme.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

No they're not a deathstar but you are right, three Thunderwolves will overkill medium blobs of infantry. So, if they're almost guaranteed to reach and kill off ten Fire Warriors what do you do?

You don't spend more points buying weapons for melee or take bigger squads to try to fight the TWC off - you take two squads of five and deploy them so the TWC are forced to kill 45 points per turn over two turns rather than having the potential of mutilating more than a hundred points in a single turn.

I know an AM player who flat out laughts at Deathstars.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Galas wrote:
First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Only if you put no thought into tactics before deploying.
There's a simple consideration that stops the fastest and even the meanest melee unit cold - the game is a maximum of seven turns.
A smart player sets up terrain and his/her units so any melee unit can kill a maximum of one unit per turn. How many places can a Deathstar be at once?

Depends on the size of the deathstar. You ever seen a full squad of thunderwoofs with as many characters with cyberwoof "wargear" as possible? Or the 50 woof strong cyberwoof formation which then had a bunch of characters attached to it? Green tide (the formation, not the concept)? They can cover a truely absurd amount of area and because multi-charge is a thing, it's very, very possible to assault half a dozen (or more!) units across the entire legnth of a battlefield, even on Dawn of War deployment. Gets even worse for the handfull of have-not armies that aren't immune to morale since (in 7th anyway) each unit gets to take a check against total casualties caused, so enjoy testing at -17 since their combat characters got into a squad or 2 of squishies while their chaff is re-rolling their 4++.

Proper deathstars can kill far, far more than 1 unit a turn. God forbid you end up with those sort of rules and what used to be superheavies/GMC's keep their 12" move. Can you imagine 5 IK's/WK's with a 36" (or 37", whatever) threat range every turn? No thanks.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
No they're not a deathstar but you are right, three Thunderwolves will overkill medium blobs of infantry. So, if they're almost guaranteed to reach and kill off ten Fire Warriors what do you do?

You don't spend more points buying weapons for melee or take bigger squads to try to fight the TWC off - you take two squads of five and deploy them so the TWC are forced to kill 45 points per turn over two turns rather than having the potential of mutilating more than a hundred points in a single turn.

I know an AM player who flat out laughts at Deathstars.

And 3 TWC costs what...100 pts or so? So you would have about double the units. Lose half of them in first turn without getting to do anything in return. I doubt you will kill TWC with rest.

And of course he might not go for your fire warriors but crisis team, broadside, riptides etc. 37" threat range allows getting into those pretty well...

 Drasius wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Galas wrote:
First turn assault armies are as bad to the game as shooting armies destroying the enemy army in the first turn.

If you eliminate the manouvering, use of cover, and movement of this game, it just becomes a dice fest with 0 player interaction.
I don't think if people is actually knowing what all those bufs of: charge= movementx2 or movement+1d6, etc... will mean to the game.

Only if you put no thought into tactics before deploying.
There's a simple consideration that stops the fastest and even the meanest melee unit cold - the game is a maximum of seven turns.
A smart player sets up terrain and his/her units so any melee unit can kill a maximum of one unit per turn. How many places can a Deathstar be at once?

Depends on the size of the deathstar. You ever seen a full squad of thunderwoofs with as many characters with cyberwoof "wargear" as possible? Or the 50 woof strong cyberwoof formation which then had a bunch of characters attached to it? Green tide (the formation, not the concept)? They can cover a truely absurd amount of area and because multi-charge is a thing, it's very, very possible to assault half a dozen (or more!) units across the entire legnth of a battlefield, even on Dawn of War deployment. Gets even worse for the handfull of have-not armies that aren't immune to morale since (in 7th anyway) each unit gets to take a check against total casualties caused, so enjoy testing at -17 since their combat characters got into a squad or 2 of squishies while their chaff is re-rolling their 4++.

Proper deathstars can kill far, far more than 1 unit a turn. God forbid you end up with those sort of rules and what used to be superheavies/GMC's keep their 12" move. Can you imagine 5 IK's/WK's with a 36" (or 37", whatever) threat range every turn? No thanks.

I play Space Wolves in Apocalypse games, I'm familliar with all these things.
Space Wolf deathstars can be beaten by a bottle neck. If a melee Deathstar can only reach one unit per turn it can only kill one unit per turn no matter how big, fast or nasty it is.

Imperial Knights and Wraithknights aren't Deathstars, they're their own brand of nonsense that I think should be relegated back to Apocalypse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
No they're not a deathstar but you are right, three Thunderwolves will overkill medium blobs of infantry. So, if they're almost guaranteed to reach and kill off ten Fire Warriors what do you do?

You don't spend more points buying weapons for melee or take bigger squads to try to fight the TWC off - you take two squads of five and deploy them so the TWC are forced to kill 45 points per turn over two turns rather than having the potential of mutilating more than a hundred points in a single turn.

I know an AM player who flat out laughts at Deathstars.

And 3 TWC costs what...100 pts or so? So you would have about double the units. Lose half of them in first turn without getting to do anything in return. I doubt you will kill TWC with rest.

And of course he might not go for your fire warriors but crisis team, broadside, riptides etc. 37" threat range allows getting into those pretty well...

Thunderwolf cavalry costs 120 points if they have no upgrades.
Is the concept of using terrain to limit movement just lost on some people? Too much time demanding an open shooting range?

Too much time on an open shooting range actually.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Thunderwolf cavalry costs 120 points if they have no upgrades.
Is the concept of using terrain to limit movement just lost on some people? Too much time demanding an open shooting range?

So you have less than 10 firewarriors to shoot down 3 TWC. If they survive less than 5 to try to finish.

And terrain? With 37" you can pretty much bypass until charge and then -2". Wopedoo. 35" is also enough that you can just T1 tie up your crisis teams etc.

How anybody can think having 37" threat range is good thing is pretty odd. That basically removes any chance of shooting them and all terrain that's not impassable(but preferably not LOS blocking) as credible threat to slow down opponent.

There is the fact that we simply do not now what movement anything except Marines/Dreadnoughts and Guilliman actually have.
There is no guarantee that TWC will have M 12.
As one of the "heaviest" cavalry they might actually be slower than now.

So replace TWC with tzeentch screamers, slaanesh riders, jump packs etc. Point is less about specific unit but more about ability to have ridiculously long threat range like 37" that would be for M12 units(and doubtful jump packs will take slowdown effect...) that allows T1 combats cheaply without ability to shoot regardless of pretty much any terrain that's not impassable(and even that doesn't stop jump packs)...

How anybody can think having 37" threat range is good thing is pretty odd.

You mean like pretty much every high damage shooting platform?

I actually agree on this, that huge charge ranges should not be easily achieved as being able to get into an opponents back line with multiple units, that they cant really hurt is, not ideal.

However I think that some reliability would have been better (say a blanket 4+d6 or half movement, minimum 3 + D6).
The idea of first turn charges isn't such a bad thing, in a world when your opponent can disengage from said combat at will. Or should we also suggest that first turn shooting is also unfair, because large threat ranges are wrong?

If we were looking for parity between shooting and assault, I would actually be ok with keeping 2D6 for charging, but also reduce the range of all weapons by 12, and then make them add 2D6 to their range, also Id make all shooting be declared before resolving any of it, so that its actually possible to make mistakes in the amount of force you choose to apply to things (you know like the choices that close combat focused armies have to make).

Earth127 wrote:
Plz don't make such off topic jokes.

So much of this depends on stuff we don't know. Let's just w8 and see I guess.

Please don't use text-speech words. "W8" is not a word. If you're going to throw stones at someone else, please sell your glass house.

On topic...I play daemons and I recognize the thematic role of overwatch. Plus, it makes you vary your list to try to deal with it. I have no issue with overwatch and I expect my guys to have nice and enjoyable charge ranges (lots of wings, lots of Slaanesh). Maybe I can use my Keeper of Secrets again?!

 CadianGateTroll wrote:

 alanmckenzie wrote:
Not a lot of change.

To be honest, I was really hoping for a M+D6 charge range.

i like that but why did they not do it?

Not sure but perhaps they thought a min move distance +d6 and potential within 1 inch was too much of a head-start to charge.. For termies that would be 5+1d6 plus 1 inch. 7 inch threat range for an auto charge. 8 inch for marines.

Lot of passion on this topic and I do not fault anyone for it though I feel I could go either way.

Really looking forward to today's update!

Souleater wrote:II am scratching my head at the prohibition on moving within one inch of an enemy you aren't assaultin. Didn't we have that a couple of editions ago and it was found to be exploitable?

We have that now. In fact its one of the reasons why Multiple Assaults have a rule for Charging multiple units. Indeed, that is one of the things it specifically mentions in the linked article.

Now, currently there are consequences for doing a Multiple Charge, but they haven't said if there are any similar consequences for doing so in the next Edition.