Maybe this is just venting, but just like I expected, I am getting quite frustrated by the fall back rules.
When I first heard about it, I thought that perhaps it would be balanced out by the ability to pile in/consolidate into a second unit, and that the unit that fell back couldn't shoot (though the entire rest of the army could).
But now, more and more and more stuff is getting to fall back without any real penalty. Half the tau codex (units that fly). More than half the eldar codex (the same). Potentially, the ENTIRE guard codex (infantry units & get back in the fight orders). And now, all ultramarines base, with a measly -1 to hit modifier. And mork knows what else in the future.
And, honestly, I'm not entirely against the fall back mechanic existing. I get that not everyone has proper orky values, and a tau player may not want to keep his lone fire warrior tied in close combat with meganobz.
But it just seems to me that fall back should be a last resort, not your go-to strategy, and should come with some major penalties that a ton of units don't outright ignore. Something like on a 6+, you lose a model from the unit that fell back, or the unit that you're running from gets another consolidate move/fight phase, or both? Or something? I just hate that everything gets to just waltz out of combat without even being challenged.
I mean, this is getting ridiculous. Between cover not benefiting my army at ALL, and the fact I can never keep anyone tied in close combat, my reward for playing is for my opponent to be shot at across the table, shot at in overwatch, them to fall back, shoot me without penalty, and shoot me again when I charge, until I'm dead. My only recourse is to spam the absolute piss out of wierdboyz with the jump, but that only skips the first part.
And yes, if you completely envelop your enemy they cannot fall back. I've see this occur exactly once so far. It's not that easy to accomplish, at least so far. It's not nearly enough to counter the headache that is falling back (and is 100% useless v. units that can fly).
As an IG player I can tell you that
* Infantry is a meat shield to block your melee units from getting to my tanks and artillery
* when my infantry falls back, I have to get out of melee range. On an open field? sure, no problem - but if those guardsmen are with their backs against my artillery, that's an issue.
* Only my infantry can get back in the fight and shoot after falling back. My tanks and artillery will be useless once you've broken through.
* even for infantry falling back has it's downside - I cant order them to do anything else , eg reroll 1s toHit.
Have you actually played against any of the armies you're complaining about yet? I'm asking because as an IG player it's not easy to keep you off of my guys. I've got no clue what's good in your index, but I know you have transports, I know you have bikes and I know that you have stuff that can deepstrike. It's just no longer the case that once you're within charge range you just tear my guard apart without any opposition.
I played an IG player who spammed like 300 models, and it was honestly a pretty miserable experience.
In addition to being an absurdly long and boring game, the exact problems I mentioned were a problem. I charged. They overwatched. They fell back. They shot without penalty. Repeat.
Hell, even artillery and vehicles is a pain. I charge it, they're unbelievably resilient, and I get locked in a loop where the vehicle falls back, their entire army shoots me, and I charge it again, and it overwatches again. My first game of 8th it took a unit of 20 boyz 3 separate charges to NOT kill a wyvern.
And as for 'ripping apart', IG units, he was able to form then in blocks, and between that and barely making a 9" charge, I was able to get like half my boyz into effective range. I killed maybe a dozen conscripts, out of 50. They fell back, etc, etc.
Ditto for eldar. I charge their vehicles. They overwatch. They fall back without penalty. They shoot. Repeat. Same thing for their jump MCs, warp spyders, even played a game v. a revenant titan with 6D6 auto hitting shots at range and in overwatch. That wasn't much fun.
Admittedly, I haven't played tau, but I know for firsthand fact it's not fun when facing IG and eldar, and I can extrapolate.
Space Wolves melee army, im frustrated about it. I get shot to peices quite brutally.
So i figured, lets celebrate 8th editions "love for close combat" by getting myself a tank division for my space wolves. Well played GW, more money in your pocket.
How is this much different from a CC unit charging in and wiping out a unit? Dedicated CC troops generally evaporate the stuff they charge to the point of uselessness. Two or three guardsmen falling back isn't worth giving an order to shoot if there's any other unit nearby to give that order.
What's really stupid? A lone Terminator charging a unit and hiding from shooting for 2-3 turns, grinding the unit to a fine paste because they can't run away. I'm glad that's over with.
John Prins wrote: How is this much different from a CC unit charging in and wiping out a unit? Dedicated CC troops generally evaporate the stuff they charge to the point of uselessness. Two or three guardsmen falling back isn't worth giving an order to shoot if there's any other unit nearby to give that order.
What's really stupid? A lone Terminator charging a unit and hiding from shooting for 2-3 turns, grinding the unit to a fine paste because they can't run away. I'm glad that's over with.
LIke I said in my OP, I get it from the other end, and I'm ok with falling back existing in some capacity, but being able to do it unchallenged, and having a ton of units that outright ignore its penalties, is starting to become frustrating to me.
I don't understand the issue. When you charge you're killing stuff, and then whhats left over isn't going to contribute much. I can maybe see why someone might be annoyed, but it isn't a big deal.
The issue that my reward for making a successful charge is to immediately be blasted to pieces by the entire enemy army at point blank range, often times by the remainder of the unit that I had charged and fled from combat without challenge or penalty.
John Prins wrote: How is this much different from a CC unit charging in and wiping out a unit? Dedicated CC troops generally evaporate the stuff they charge to the point of uselessness. Two or three guardsmen falling back isn't worth giving an order to shoot if there's any other unit nearby to give that order.
What's really stupid? A lone Terminator charging a unit and hiding from shooting for 2-3 turns, grinding the unit to a fine paste because they can't run away. I'm glad that's over with.
LIke I said in my OP, I get it from the other end, and I'm ok with falling back existing in some capacity, but being able to do it unchallenged, and having a ton of units that outright ignore its penalties, is starting to become frustrating to me.
There's a little too much of GW's old all-or-nothing attitude showing through here; it's too easy to get out of combat and still shoot normally for a lot of units, but it's also too easy to get top-of-turn-one charges that your opponent can't do squat about for a lot of units (Deep Strike, Daemon Princes, Heldrakes...). I don't think outright ignoring the penalties is the answer but if you stack on too many penalties you risk making a huge chunk of the game unplayable in the face of the turn-one aggro-melee-rush.
Getting an IG player to waste orders on depleted units is a win. The problem you had was that Conscripts are unbalanced cheese at the moment. IG conscript spam is a known issue.
Forcing a tank to fall back and not be able to shoot is a win.
I can see Jet bikes being a PITA, but they've always been cheese, they're just slightly less cheesy this edition.
Crisis Suits are expensive as heck (50-80 points a pop), so I don't think it's unfair for them to fall back and shoot.
And, to be fair, even though I said half the eldar and tau codex ignore fall back penalties due to fly, it honestly seems fair enough. If you're fast or can fly, it makes sense to quit a fight you don't want to be a part of.
But even the old hit & run rules had a chance to fail, even for things like warp spyders.
I think I'd be happy if falling back was some kind of characteristic or move test, buffed if you can fly. But I think it's just dumb for guardsmen to just simply walk away from a horde of ork boyz unchallenged and get to shoot normally.
Kap'n Krump wrote: I played an IG player who spammed like 300 models, and it was honestly a pretty miserable experience.
In addition to being an absurdly long and boring game, the exact problems I mentioned were a problem. I charged. They overwatched. They fell back. They shot without penalty. Repeat.
Hell, even artillery and vehicles is a pain. I charge it, they're unbelievably resilient, and I get locked in a loop where the vehicle falls back, their entire army shoots me, and I charge it again, and it overwatches again. My first game of 8th it took a unit of 20 boyz 3 separate charges to NOT kill a wyvern.
And as for 'ripping apart', IG units, he was able to form then in blocks, and between that and barely making a 9" charge, I was able to get like half my boyz into effective range. I killed maybe a dozen conscripts, out of 50. They fell back, etc, etc.
Ditto for eldar. I charge their vehicles. They overwatch. They fall back without penalty. They shoot. Repeat. Same thing for their jump MCs, warp spyders, even played a game v. a revenant titan with 6D6 auto hitting shots at range and in overwatch. That wasn't much fun.
Admittedly, I haven't played tau, but I know for firsthand fact it's not fun when facing IG and eldar, and I can extrapolate.
Don't use conscripts as your judge for 40k new rules, they're overpowered right now. AM in general is undercosted and just crapping all over people.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
John Prins wrote: Getting an IG player to waste orders on depleted units is a win. The problem you had was that Conscripts are unbalanced cheese at the moment. IG conscript spam is a known issue.
John Prins wrote: How is this much different from a CC unit charging in and wiping out a unit? Dedicated CC troops generally evaporate the stuff they charge to the point of uselessness. Two or three guardsmen falling back isn't worth giving an order to shoot if there's any other unit nearby to give that order.
What's really stupid? A lone Terminator charging a unit and hiding from shooting for 2-3 turns, grinding the unit to a fine paste because they can't run away. I'm glad that's over with.
LIke I said in my OP, I get it from the other end, and I'm ok with falling back existing in some capacity, but being able to do it unchallenged, and having a ton of units that outright ignore its penalties, is starting to become frustrating to me.
There's a little too much of GW's old all-or-nothing attitude showing through here; it's too easy to get out of combat and still shoot normally for a lot of units, but it's also too easy to get top-of-turn-one charges that your opponent can't do squat about for a lot of units (Deep Strike, Daemon Princes, Heldrakes...). I don't think outright ignoring the penalties is the answer but if you stack on too many penalties you risk making a huge chunk of the game unplayable in the face of the turn-one aggro-melee-rush.
I disagree. You still need to roll a 9 on 2d6, under optimal conditions to first turn charge. So, 1/3rd chance under best circumstances, 2/3rd chance to fail and be expensive cannon fodder.
They really should require some sort of roll to fall back and you lose one guy for every 6+ or something like that. That way it's an actual sacrifice and punishes you for bad positioning instead of punishing melee armies for making it across the field and making that gakky random charge roll.
I hear you, and yes, this edition is different.
Please remember the game is designed to be a tactical game of strategic maneuvering and match ups. It can be played as a game of I place my models, move forward as fast as they can and charge, but that is not its design. 40k is chess, no checkers, and a big part of this is in buying your army. You will lose to the guy who buys, places, and moves to maximize his if all you do is charge the bulk of his army.
This edition supports lots of models on the table, and damage absorption by units.
This is the constant war between balance and play-ability. On one side, the turn one charge melee army is absolutely doable for most codices. So if they can get in combat and be immune, the game is really a half turn game of who goes first (one of the earlier editions this was basically the case, and games lasted 2 turns at most) We do not want that back.
Now, please keep in mind the balance of the game is on points, meaning, does a unit of 30 orc boyz charge in and kill its equivalent in points before getting zapped dead. That is always your goal as a player: Make your points back. If you expect one unit of boyz to go on a rampage and wipe out 1k of enemy, you are asking too much.
Conscripts ARE a bad example right now, because of the commissar rule.
Otherwise, you mentioned half your boyz reach combat...well that is 45 and possibly more attacks. Without the commissar, that's a dead unit of conscripts( say 14 orcs made it with a banner waver guy (56 attacks, 37 hits, 15 wounds, 15 dead models, 14 removed by morale ( no orc codex so might be slightly off on the 4 attacks each...and I am ignoring any damage from pistols, yes I know, orcs...but that is still a few)) which means he would have shot you with the rest of his army anyway...so the issue here isn't the fall back move...it is the ignore morale move.
Example of use in a game. My friend runs a horde orc army, where he comes in three waves, the first of 60 boyz (2 units of 30), the second 2 of 30. The first get shot to nothing (but still remain because of mob rule). The second tends to hit at near full strength. And the third piles in one turn later almost untouched. That is two turns of 100+ CC attacks against as many units as he can touch. And the cost for all those boyz is 1/3 of his army. So CC can work even with the fall back.
The bottom line is, the balance point in this game right now is that CC units get to charge one unit, wipe them out, and then the game goes on. If I have to finish off that unit on my turn, then other units are being ignored to do their purpose. If your CC units are not making their points up at all, then rethink how you use them, how you buy them, etc.
I run a guard CC army, and generally do fine with it.
The army I see suffering the most from this is the expensive, elite type armies who simply cannot get the bodies on the table to absorb shooting. When my vanguard vets charge, few things survive. then they get shot, yes...but if I wiped out my points and more, I won...
My seraphim never survive CC to fall back...
Get you CC units lined up against a portion of his army. Force him to split his fire up away from them. Don't get frustrated, get better, adapt, change, you will feel so much better when his tactics suddenly prove the weaker. I've been stomped in games myself...
Rethink that 9+...there are far too many ways to re-roll dice now. So 9" charges have become far more viable. There are multiple threads doing the numbers, Anything close to 50% chance is a big deal, and this doesn't count a lot of scout moves. For example, scout sentinels can easily engage in CC turn one...if my opponent has to spend his first turn falling back with 3-4 units and shooting those sentinels. I have already won that game. I dont care what the damage they did was.
If ultramarines, a fairly generic chapter, are getting this ability, then it would not surprise me that as more codex come out we'll see similar abilities be more prevalent until pretty much every non-pure assault army has access to it. People get up over arms about turn one assault units and assault unit 'wiping units out" but how much overlap is there of that? Kommandoes infiltrating is for tying down back units and if they can't do that I might as well just saying they're choppa boyz to save points.
If ultramarines, a fairly generic chapter, are getting this ability, then it would not surprise me that as more codex come out we'll see similar abilities be more prevalent until pretty much every non-pure assault army has access to it. People get up over arms about turn one assault units and assault unit 'wiping units out" but how much overlap is there of that? Kommandoes infiltrating is for tying down back units and if they can't do that I might as well just saying they're choppa boyz to save points.
You need to surround enemies to trap them now. which is annoying,
If ultramarines, a fairly generic chapter, are getting this ability, .
It has been confirmed that ultramarines are getting the chapter tactic that they fall back and only suffer -1 penalty to shoot. Can't assault (I think).
I'm rather amused by your annoyance at so many Tau units having Fly. Would you rather go back to 7th edition where their JSJ meant that you couldn't even assault them in the first place?
You've also fallen into the trap of assuming that the battles we're simulating here actually take place in a series of turns. Being able to fall back, and melee units chasing them down and charging again and again represents a rolling fight, or a rout. It's just like a unit that's backpedalling before you reach charge range. The only difference is that once you're in charge range, they're still backpedalling, but this time you keep getting close enough to krump 'em every now and then.
As an ork player I'd say.... no way. I think the fall back rules are very balanced and improves the game. Getting charged is no longer a death sentence, but on the other hand people tend to get charged a lot more. Combat is much easier to get out of, but it is also much easier to get in to. And the game is much better for it.
In 7th edition close combat was a death sentence for shooty units, and that was balanced out by making cc very difficult to get in to, and by making transports blow up by being looked at sternly. I don't miss those times.
The numerous units that can fall back and shoot, generally pays a price for such a powerful ability. Crisis suits are expensive and fragile for example.
A notable exception is conscripts. That 50 conscripts can benefit from a single order is overpowered, and conscripts can be extremely frustrating to play against. Conscripts needs a nerf (and the Leman russ needs a buff), but that is not really related to the fall back rule.
I've played several melee vs ranged matchups from both sides, and I've had instances where fall back was super frustrating and resulted in a one-sided game, and where it was totally useless because the whole army was basically stunlocked.
There have also been games (such as where I played vs an eldar armored list) that it really was just such a constant that I didn't care much about it. I just kind of factored in that the enemy would be shooting to full effect after my attacks, and I made sure I charged with enough stuff to cripple or kill my targets, while leaving others completely alone.
As to getting across the board, yeah it seems orks have two options: Da Jump and just spamming fast stuff. Well, and mek mob. Killa Kanz have proven to be durable as all get out in the games I've played with them. Running a unit of six killa kanz, the worst I've done before they get to swing in combat is 2 casualties - and then they VERY quickly make their points back, because S8 AP-3 3 damage is no joke (just make sure you bring a waagh banner!)
Of my two major ork playstyles, mek mob with a 30-man distraction jump squad has netted me more success than speed freeks so far. trukks living through a turn of firepower is a dicy prospect wheras Kanz Nauts and Dreads are harder to carve through. Trukk boyz seem very underwhelming this edition, but my last game a mostly shooty speed freek did great.
My buddy plays ork and Eldar, and I play Admech, Tyranids and Guard (in 8th thus far, I have too many armies to play them all right now, too much to focus on) and I have never encountered any scenarios like the ones you're posting.
Just to be clear, make sure you and your buddy are playing correctly. He only gets to fall back on his turn, after you have resolved melee the melee phase and it switches to his turn. Your orks should be having little to no trouble mopping up Eldar, IG or really anyhting for the matter in close combat. If so, you may have just been rolling poorly, cause a 30 ork boy squad should be throwing about 120 dice at your charge target.
A couple questions if I may. Are you using transports? Are you playing varied game modes? Such as different mission types not just kill points. Are you and your buddy list tailoring? Have you tried combined arms yet?
My buddy who has been playing orks has had no trouble getting into melee with me after turn 2 and has had no issues with his ork boys, nobz and killa kans nearly wiping any squad they get into melee with. Even beating out my Tyranids in melee often, (unless I get the charge off or use a stratagem to interrupt his attacks).
It's a terrible mechanic as it stands. It should at very minimum tied to a stat and not automatic. As others have pointed out, even hit and run could fail.
If you're doing assault right you should be having 3-4 units hitting their lines at the same time, piling into several more units.
I use this stuff all the time with just Saint Celestine. A good charge by her can stop 3-4 units from shooting next turn by herself. The support units of seraphim neuter the opponents shooting for an entire turn.
Maybe this is just venting, but just like I expected, I am getting quite frustrated by the fall back rules.
It's just venting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kap'n Krump wrote: Potentially, the ENTIRE guard codex (infantry units & get back in the fight orders).
You do realize that leaves the tanks and other armored vehicles, right? . Whose shooting is the heart of the AM's firepower.
And you do realize that the AM have to have officers to give those orders, and that the Company Commander can order 2 units while Lieutenant's can order one unit, right? So that it's basically impossible for all the infantry units in an army to get that fall back and shoot order in the same turn?
I do believe the fall back rules are a bit too lenient on the guys falling back, yes. After trying several lists, any melee unit that doesn't hit like an absolute truck looks worthless to me now. Bland assault marines for example. They were traditionally used to pester shooty units long enough for the other heavier units to do work. Now they just get walked away from after dropping a guy or two then murdered.
My new test for if a melee unit goes in a list is "will you absolutely destroy whatever you make it to?" If the answer is no, it's shelved.
Consequently I've started playing shootier lists, and on the other side of the coin, whenever someone assaults and I just waltz away from them, it feels OP as hell.
I think maybe it should have been a roll off with a +1 to your roll if you have the FLY keyword.
It seems overpowered. But then again I play Orks and play against Eldar/Ynnari and Ultramarines mainly. So it's not like they suffer the negative when falling back (or rather advancing forward if they're space elves).
niv-mizzet wrote: I do believe the fall back rules are a bit too lenient on the guys falling back, yes. After trying several lists, any melee unit that doesn't hit like an absolute truck looks worthless to me now. Bland assault marines for example. They were traditionally used to pester shooty units long enough for the other heavier units to do work. Now they just get walked away from after dropping a guy or two then murdered.
My new test for if a melee unit goes in a list is "will you absolutely destroy whatever you make it to?" If the answer is no, it's shelved.
Consequently I've started playing shootier lists, and on the other side of the coin, whenever someone assaults and I just waltz away from them, it feels OP as hell.
How is that going to solve your issues with 8th edition? OK, lets say your uberunit just slaughtered my single unit of guardsmen. Congratulations, you've just invested about 300-500 points into a unit that's able to kill ONE 50 points unit per turn. Your unit is now out in the open. "You'll never guess what happened next!"
What I noticed is that people still don't get how incredibly useful multicharge is now. You are not losing a bonus attack anymore, you trade addition overwatch (YOU pick which model dies IF they manage to kill something) for the ability to force multiple units into fallback.
That Assault Marine squad shouldn't try to wipe out a unit - it should try to force as many units as possible into combat so that your terminator squad can charge through next turn. The game isn't effectively over now once you reach the enemy lines even though you're a melee list and the defender is a gunline list, and that's great. watching your army get torn apart without ANY chance to strike back wasn't fun at all in 7th.
I think perhaps the unit falling back should risk taking mortal wounds, but otherwise I like the mechanic.
- I like that there's finally a reason to want to win combat - since you can no longer rely on being immune to shooting if you're still in combat on the enemy turn.
- I like that shooty units don't just keep fighting in melee when it makes no sense whatsoever.
- I like that units being in combat doesn't prevent me from shooting them (well, technically it does, but I can now have those units fall back).
The current rules aren't perfect but I think they're a definite improvement on 7th.
niv-mizzet wrote: I do believe the fall back rules are a bit too lenient on the guys falling back, yes. After trying several lists, any melee unit that doesn't hit like an absolute truck looks worthless to me now. Bland assault marines for example. They were traditionally used to pester shooty units long enough for the other heavier units to do work. Now they just get walked away from after dropping a guy or two then murdered.
My new test for if a melee unit goes in a list is "will you absolutely destroy whatever you make it to?" If the answer is no, it's shelved.
Consequently I've started playing shootier lists, and on the other side of the coin, whenever someone assaults and I just waltz away from them, it feels OP as hell.
How is that going to solve your issues with 8th edition? OK, lets say your uberunit just slaughtered my single unit of guardsmen. Congratulations, you've just invested about 300-500 points into a unit that's able to kill ONE 50 points unit per turn. Your unit is now out in the open. "You'll never guess what happened next!"
What I noticed is that people still don't get how incredibly useful multicharge is now. You are not losing a bonus attack anymore, you trade addition overwatch (YOU pick which model dies IF they manage to kill something) for the ability to force multiple units into fallback.
That Assault Marine squad shouldn't try to wipe out a unit - it should try to force as many units as possible into combat so that your terminator squad can charge through next turn. The game isn't effectively over now once you reach the enemy lines even though you're a melee list and the defender is a gunline list, and that's great. watching your army get torn apart without ANY chance to strike back wasn't fun at all in 7th.
I wouldn't charge a unit of guardsmen. I'd shoot it out of the way and let the good unit pass by. Use the right tool for the right target. The problem with those cheap melee units armed with combat pillows is that the right target for them doesn't tend to be in the opponent's army.
And you're not telling me anything new with multicharge. I think I've multicharged more than regular charged since the edition started.
Like I said, when I'm playing shooty lists, me walking away from combat with no penalty and no chance of failure feels OP. When I'm running assault forces in the list, them walking away from combat with no penalty and no chance of failure feels OP. After all the shenanigans needed to get to combat in the first place and the damage you take on the way there, dropping a few putzes out of the unit only to watch the special weapons walk away feels like a slap in the face.
I'll add that when I've run shooty lists, I haven't lost to a list that involved any significant (25% or more) amount of melee elements. I haven't even had a close game against them. Complete blowouts. Had close games against other shooting lists though.
Also watched a game the other day of crons v. daemons. The cron list, he made sure every unit had fly. Destroyers, tomb blades, praetorians, doom scythes...it wasn't even a game. Two different times the necrons started their turn with all or almost all of their units in melee...and just all chillax walked backwards and mowed down more dudes while their own guys got back up.
rollawaythestone wrote: I think Fall-Back is fine. It's a really powerful tactical ability that adds a dynamism back to close combat.
However, I think some of the ways to mitigate the draw backs of Fall-Back might be too prevalent and powerful.
I generally agree. I mean, I get that it's a viable tool in the toolbox, but the fact that anything can do it guaranteed and free, and that many can do it with little to no penalties really makes it broken to me.
So, I'm perfectly fine with it existing as a mechanic, but I still feel as if its current state is really favoring shooting armies.
rollawaythestone wrote: I think Fall-Back is fine. It's a really powerful tactical ability that adds a dynamism back to close combat.
However, I think some of the ways to mitigate the draw backs of Fall-Back might be too prevalent and powerful.
This. I'm not saying fall back is a bad mechanic, but no-penalty fall back is really easy to get and instantly shelves the softer assault units that aren't just going to put them 6 feet under when they connect.
I think I'd be happy with a free single swing from each model you walk away from.
The fact that charging is still random and the charging unit also has to endure overwatch (sometimes from multiple units) only to have the unit they charge waltz away with zero chance of failure is just silly. It's also not terribly cinematic, the humanitarian chaos lord is a real head-scratcher, why just one edition past there would be a chance for him to mercilessly cut down the whole unit he charged as opposed to simply allowing them to walk/fly away at their leisure and half the time shoot because reasons.
There should be a chance of failure in attempting to disengage a unit from combat. Is that too much to ask of a game where combi-plasmas can destroy a vehicle on overheat?
Crablezworth wrote: The fact that charging is still random and the charging unit also has to endure overwatch (sometimes from multiple units) only to have the unit they charge waltz away with zero chance of failure is just silly. It's also not terribly cinematic, the humanitarian chaos lord is a real head-scratcher, why just one edition past there would be a chance for him to mercilessly cut down the whole unit he charged as opposed to simply allowing them to walk/fly away at their leisure and half the time shoot because reasons.
There should be a chance of failure in attempting to disengage a unit from combat. Is that too much to ask of a game where combi-plasmas can destroy a vehicle on overheat?
He's not letting them waltz away, assuming he charges again next turn. The battles we're simulating don't take place on a turn by turn basis, they're real-time, so yes, if a Chaos Lord wants to charge into glorious combat with a bunch of guardsmen, then yes, he's gonna have to chase them a bit.
Admit it, you're not bothered by the fact that the enemy can fall back, you're bothered by the fact that reaching close combat is no longer an automatic win for assault units.
Tylendal wrote: Admit it, you're not bothered by the fact that the enemy can fall back, you're bothered by the fact that reaching close combat is no longer an automatic win for assault units.
Where the feth have you been for the last 2 editions? Assault wasn't auto win since 4th.
Tylendal wrote: Admit it, you're not bothered by the fact that the enemy can fall back, you're bothered by the fact that reaching close combat is no longer an automatic win for assault units.
Where the feth have you been for the last 2 editions? Assault wasn't auto win since 4th.
The fact that, until 8th edition, "Tarpit" was still a relevant word, makes it clear that up until now, CQC was almost always a case of "Two units enter, one unit leaves".
BaconCatBug wrote: Fall back needs to go back to a sweeping advance system. Roll off, +1 if you have more movement than the enemy, +1 if you have FLY
Make Wyches have a +1 on top of that.
No. Just, no.
Sweeping advance was the single most unfair rule GW ever came up with.
You want to know what being hit by sweeping advance felt like? Remember what being tabled by IG template spam felt like?
That's what sweeping advance was like for shooty armies. The withdraw move is a wonderful middle-ground. You get to punch us in the face, and we get to shoot you for it. It means that we both get to play the goddamn game, which is what CC, in prior editions, never allowed shooty armies to do.
I disagree. You still need to roll a 9 on 2d6, under optimal conditions to first turn charge. So, 1/3rd chance under best circumstances, 2/3rd chance to fail and be expensive cannon fodder.
They really should require some sort of roll to fall back and you lose one guy for every 6+ or something like that. That way it's an actual sacrifice and punishes you for bad positioning instead of punishing melee armies for making it across the field and making that gakky random charge roll.
Sure. But in return, squads you charge can fire overwatch with normal frag grenades at normal WS, since that's...you know...how you'd actually respond to an enemy charging in with melee weapons when you have frag grenades available (no, not "a frag grenade". All the frag grenades). Know what you call a soldier with a bayonet in his chest and a bandoleer full of frag grenades? A suicide.
If you're relying on just a 9+ charge and nothing else, you're either not really taking advantage of a first turn charge, or you should have the numbers and/or armor saves to just tough it out.
If ultramarines, a fairly generic chapter, are getting this ability, then it would not surprise me that as more codex come out we'll see similar abilities be more prevalent until pretty much every non-pure assault army has access to it. People get up over arms about turn one assault units and assault unit 'wiping units out" but how much overlap is there of that? Kommandoes infiltrating is for tying down back units and if they can't do that I might as well just saying they're choppa boyz to save points.
You need to surround enemies to trap them now. which is annoying,
niv-mizzet wrote: I do believe the fall back rules are a bit too lenient on the guys falling back, yes. After trying several lists, any melee unit that doesn't hit like an absolute truck looks worthless to me now. Bland assault marines for example. They were traditionally used to pester shooty units long enough for the other heavier units to do work. Now they just get walked away from after dropping a guy or two then murdered.
My new test for if a melee unit goes in a list is "will you absolutely destroy whatever you make it to?" If the answer is no, it's shelved.
Consequently I've started playing shootier lists, and on the other side of the coin, whenever someone assaults and I just waltz away from them, it feels OP as hell.
How is that going to solve your issues with 8th edition? OK, lets say your uberunit just slaughtered my single unit of guardsmen. Congratulations, you've just invested about 300-500 points into a unit that's able to kill ONE 50 points unit per turn. Your unit is now out in the open. "You'll never guess what happened next!"
What I noticed is that people still don't get how incredibly useful multicharge is now. You are not losing a bonus attack anymore, you trade addition overwatch (YOU pick which model dies IF they manage to kill something) for the ability to force multiple units into fallback. That Assault Marine squad shouldn't try to wipe out a unit - it should try to force as many units as possible into combat so that your terminator squad can charge through next turn. The game isn't effectively over now once you reach the enemy lines even though you're a melee list and the defender is a gunline list, and that's great. watching your army get torn apart without ANY chance to strike back wasn't fun at all in 7th.
They're also quite good at flying over enemy units and charging them from behind so that you can pin them in place.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
niv-mizzet wrote: Also watched a game the other day of crons v. daemons. The cron list, he made sure every unit had fly. Destroyers, tomb blades, praetorians, doom scythes...it wasn't even a game. Two different times the necrons started their turn with all or almost all of their units in melee...and just all chillax walked backwards and mowed down more dudes while their own guys got back up.
And everything you just named is hideously expensive so it's not like he didn't pay for being able to do that.
It's almost as if it was a strategy, or something...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
vipoid wrote: I think perhaps the unit falling back should risk taking mortal wounds, but otherwise I like the mechanic.
- I like that there's finally a reason to want to win combat - since you can no longer rely on being immune to shooting if you're still in combat on the enemy turn.
- I like that shooty units don't just keep fighting in melee when it makes no sense whatsoever.
- I like that units being in combat doesn't prevent me from shooting them (well, technically it does, but I can now have those units fall back).
The current rules aren't perfect but I think they're a definite improvement on 7th.
While I'm a huge fan of the fallback move, I do think there is definite room for assault-army-specific ways to mitigate it. What I don't think the game needs are general methods for every army to mitigate CC, considering that some of the armies in the game are very, very shooting-focused.
Should you be heavily punished for withdrawing from melee with Tau Firewarriors? How about Necron Warriors? Imperial Guard Infantry? I think these armies have enough benefits already.
World Eaters? I'd vastly prefer it if they got a way to penalize you from attempting to flee that was unique to them.
Tylendal wrote: Admit it, you're not bothered by the fact that the enemy can fall back, you're bothered by the fact that reaching close combat is no longer an automatic win for assault units.
Where the feth have you been for the last 2 editions? Assault wasn't auto win since 4th.
The fact that, until 8th edition, "Tarpit" was still a relevant word, makes it clear that up until now, CQC was almost always a case of "Two units enter, one unit leaves".
Lets also not forget that one of the big changes this edition was the removal of deathstars. They were a thing in 7th.
If the game was so one-sided that even glorious rolls couldn't make it close, (seriously he yahtzee'd some disgusting resilience rolls,) then either those units aren't paying enough for the ability, or the ability needs to be toned.
Are you really trying to say that you think they nailed fall back and point costs relevant to it exactly game wide?
Everything I've seen in the game so far has me convinced that fall back is not penalized enough, including playing with it myself on both sides of the line. Sorry but random people posting "nah it's good brah" isn't changing my opinion.
niv-mizzet wrote: If the game was so one-sided that even glorious rolls couldn't make it close, (seriously he yahtzee'd some disgusting resilience rolls,) then either those units aren't paying enough for the ability, or the ability needs to be toned.
Are you really trying to say that you think they nailed fall back and point costs relevant to it exactly game wide?
Funny, they didn't remove any of the things that made shooting powerful, or make it any more tactical or strategic. Shooting is a braindead as it's always been, and any expectations on intelligent unit use are being front loaded on assault armies.
niv-mizzet wrote: If the game was so one-sided that even glorious rolls couldn't make it close, (seriously he yahtzee'd some disgusting resilience rolls,) then either those units aren't paying enough for the ability, or the ability needs to be toned.
Are you really trying to say that you think they nailed fall back and point costs relevant to it exactly game wide?
No quote?
Who are you replying to?
You, I'm on my phone and specific quoting on here out of a big post takes forever to fix up. It was in response to pointing out the extra cost of the fly shooty units, which I believe, against assault elements, the combination of the fall back and fly is giving them a ridiculous advantage not in line with the points.
Kap'n Krump wrote: I played an IG player who spammed like 300 models, and it was honestly a pretty miserable experience.
In addition to being an absurdly long and boring game, the exact problems I mentioned were a problem. I charged. They overwatched. They fell back. They shot without penalty. Repeat.
Hell, even artillery and vehicles is a pain. I charge it, they're unbelievably resilient, and I get locked in a loop where the vehicle falls back, their entire army shoots me, and I charge it again, and it overwatches again. My first game of 8th it took a unit of 20 boyz 3 separate charges to NOT kill a wyvern.
And as for 'ripping apart', IG units, he was able to form then in blocks, and between that and barely making a 9" charge, I was able to get like half my boyz into effective range. I killed maybe a dozen conscripts, out of 50. They fell back, etc, etc.
Ditto for eldar. I charge their vehicles. They overwatch. They fall back without penalty. They shoot. Repeat. Same thing for their jump MCs, warp spyders, even played a game v. a revenant titan with 6D6 auto hitting shots at range and in overwatch. That wasn't much fun.
Admittedly, I haven't played tau, but I know for firsthand fact it's not fun when facing IG and eldar, and I can extrapolate.
Don't use conscripts as your judge for 40k new rules, they're overpowered right now. AM in general is undercosted and just crapping all over people.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
John Prins wrote: Getting an IG player to waste orders on depleted units is a win. The problem you had was that Conscripts are unbalanced cheese at the moment. IG conscript spam is a known issue.
exactly
I suspect part of the problem is AM may HAVE their form of "chapter tactics" already. I'd not be suprised to see when AM gets their new codex if they instead of a blantet tactics set up, instead got differant order lists
Luke_Prowler wrote: Funny, they didn't remove any of the things that made shooting powerful, or make it any more tactical or strategic. Shooting is a braindead as it's always been, and any expectations on intelligent unit use are being front loaded on assault armies.
This feels true now that I think about it. My shooty lists have largely been winning by just shooting what comes closest. My lists that lean towards assault need coordinated strikes, backfield support, careful positioning of characters, no whiffed charges, and enemy lists that didn't go extreme on fly or speed bump units, and also didn't bother to include any kind of counter-assault unit.
I wonder if an additional consolidation rule if your opponent falls back would help take the sting out of it.
Your opponent can fall back their normal movement, and you can consolidate D6 inches in your opponent's movement phase to represent your units giving chase or re-forming. If your opponent can't get away (because their movement is blocked or a low M characteristic), and you manage to get back within 1", they stay locked in combat for the next round. However, this can't allow you to consolidate into units you're not already in combat with, and can't be used if you're still in combat with at least one unit that's not electing to fall back.
Come to think of it, this feels pretty overpowered, any thoughts?
niv-mizzet wrote: If the game was so one-sided that even glorious rolls couldn't make it close, (seriously he yahtzee'd some disgusting resilience rolls,) then either those units aren't paying enough for the ability, or the ability needs to be toned.
Are you really trying to say that you think they nailed fall back and point costs relevant to it exactly game wide?
No quote?
Who are you replying to?
You, I'm on my phone and specific quoting on here out of a big post takes forever to fix up. It was in response to pointing out the extra cost of the fly shooty units, which I believe, against assault elements, the combination of the fall back and fly is giving them a ridiculous advantage not in line with the points.
Those units are hideously expensive, and his army will fold to almost anything that is NOT an assault army.
niv-mizzet wrote:
Luke_Prowler wrote: Funny, they didn't remove any of the things that made shooting powerful, or make it any more tactical or strategic. Shooting is a braindead as it's always been, and any expectations on intelligent unit use are being front loaded on assault armies.
This feels true now that I think about it. My shooty lists have largely been winning by just shooting what comes closest. My lists that lean towards assault need coordinated strikes, backfield support, careful positioning of characters, no whiffed charges, and enemy lists that didn't go extreme on fly or speed bump units, and also didn't bother to include any kind of counter-assault unit.
They removed templates. If you think shooting is bad now, I have to wonder what you thought about previous editions. Large blast weapons and flamers got absolutely neutered in this edition. Flamers auto-hitting makes up for it as far as they are concerned, but everything else just took it in the chin. Especially against horde armies. I've personally seen a battlecannon kill 20+ gaunts with one shot before (to be fair, the player fielded over 120 of the damn things at 1850).
Luke_Prowler wrote: Funny, they didn't remove any of the things that made shooting powerful, or make it any more tactical or strategic. Shooting is a braindead as it's always been, and any expectations on intelligent unit use are being front loaded on assault armies.
This feels true now that I think about it. My shooty lists have largely been winning by just shooting what comes closest. My lists that lean towards assault need coordinated strikes, backfield support, careful positioning of characters, no whiffed charges, and enemy lists that didn't go extreme on fly or speed bump units, and also didn't bother to include any kind of counter-assault unit.
Pretty much every army that wants to get in to assault can now get in to it on the first turn, and yet you're complaining that you aren't allowed to literally table your opponents every game by having your close combat specialists be invulnerable forever?
Pretty much every army that wants to blows gak up down range can do it from first turn, and yet you're complaining that you aren't allowed to literally table your opponents every game by reducing half their army to sub-atomic ash before they can even touch you, and then be able to continue do that even after units have done the effort to get across the table to even start hurting you?
As a guard player whome came through 6th and 7th "lolz deepstrike" and "Assault lovin" hell I can honestly say that these are much needed rules. I need to be able to shoot you to do anything, and being able to disengage means that I no longer have to worry about my entire army being locked in close combat. Especially given how easy assaulting has become in 8th.
You want a hard time? Play Guard in 4th and watch as assault units role up your line, consolidating into combat after combat. Or Infinity, and try running your mary sue CC monster across the board when the enemy can shoot you back. you still have it relatively easy, dont complain.
Asura Varuna wrote: I wonder if an additional consolidation rule if your opponent falls back would help take the sting out of it.
Your opponent can fall back their normal movement, and you can consolidate D6 inches in your opponent's movement phase to represent your units giving chase or re-forming. If your opponent can't get away (because their movement is blocked or a low M characteristic), and you manage to get back within 1", they stay locked in combat for the next round. However, this can't allow you to consolidate into units you're not already in combat with, and can't be used if you're still in combat with at least one unit that's not electing to fall back.
Come to think of it, this feels pretty overpowered, any thoughts?
Yeah. It's absolutely overpowered because some units can only move like 4". Also, units that fall back cannot advance, so it's not like they're getting away from you if you try and charge again next turn.
There's just a lot wrong with the complaints that can point to a number of problems either with the army list, the tactics, or the execution on the table. It's all fixable, and none of it requires getting rid of the one rule that now allows shooty armies to actually play the game after they've been assaulted.
I'll try to hit some of them. Maybe we can get some discussion going.
Falling back is broken because...
1) They kill my AWESOME UNIT and then I lose.
One unit being destroyed loses you the game? You've got too many points sunk into that one unit. Your opponent saw this because it was obvious. There are ways to "hide" sleeper units through modeling or painting that might help or, much more preferably, you could spread some of those points out more across your list and make it less dependent on a cornerstone.
2) They withdraw every time I assault and that's why I lose.
This could be any number of things...lets break them down a bit.
2a) They literally withdraw every single time.
This tells me you're piecemealing your assault units instead of assaulting with everything all at once. This can happen if you have one unit capable of a first turn assault, a second unit that isn't, and not enough effective shooting to make the expenditure of their lives worth enough to win the game. Either that or you expect having one or two assault units to be enough to win you games on their own. It can also happen if you over-spend on a small number of CC units, and don't spread your points out enough to make the rest of your army capable of winning without them.
In the case of piecemealing your assaults, you can fix it a number of ways. The first is to make sure that all of your assaults are first-turn capable. Depending on your army that can mean doubling down on the psykers or special HQ units (swarmlord), and it's probably going to be expensive, regardless. However, if you want to win by assaulting, it's what you're going to have to do.
The second is to largely ignore first turn assault capability, and just field enough models that your opponent can't possibly kill them before you steamroll him. Orks and nids are good at this. Having one or two units that can possibly get a first turn assault can make for good distractions as successfully assaulting first turn can win you the game by tying up valuable shooting he needs to table you (komandos and lictors are terrific distractions).
If your assault units aren't there to win the game themselves, then it's your shooting that's falling short. Either you're not effectively allocating your shooting, or you spent too much on CC to have your shooting carry you. This is also whats going on if your CC is a kind of broom that's supposed to clean up after your shooting is done making a mess. If a 3rd party list review says your ratios are good, then it's probably an allocation problem and you need to run some numbers and learn what to point your guns at to get rid of them, and generally in what order to make sure your CC survives to actually run cleanup.
3) They withdraw at just the right time, and I barely lose.
You got outplayed. Shake hands, take notes, and get on with your life. Try again next time. Maybe your dice just hated you today. Close games are good. You shouldn't feel bad if it was close.
Luke_Prowler wrote: Pretty much every army that wants to blows gak up down range can do it from first turn
It's a lot easier to mitigate shooting damage the entire game, than it is to mitigate Fight phase damage after a charge. For example, cover.
But for most units, the damage put out by fighting is worse than shooting to begin with. Lack of AP or high strength, losing attacks due to needing to be within a certain distance, special weapons are either restricted to one guy or a special unit that are going to be target #1, and that's before considering dumb stuff like random charge range or overwatch (oh looky, another mechanic with no drawbacks for shooting units!). And most importantly, I can't charge AND be hiding in cover. Scratch that, cover isn't even possible OR useful for 30 boyz because of how they changed how cover.
Orks have problems that are almost unrelated to this issue. Even if you could stay in combat forever, and never got shot at because your enormous units of boyz are eternally stuck in close combat, that'd still not really save Orks from being the bottom of 8th's barrel.
The big danger of locking units in combat isn't that the unit will die, it's often only fair that an assault focused army that managed to get across the board should be very killy when it gets there, the problem is that it also makes the assaulting unit invincible to shooting. The amount of murder an assault unit puts out is usually such that if it doesn't wipe out its target on charge it will definitely finish them off in the following fight phase, the opponent's fight phase, which oh how fortunately would leave the assault unit untargetable in the opposing player's shooting phase but then free to act and assault another unit on their own turn.
I definitely do think assaulting units need a bit more utility than just 'i die in the open or i win up close' though, beyond just transport and deep strike options. The new reiver grenades are a nice new tool in the style i'd like to see more of, something you might run a minimum sized squad or 2 of to give up some raw damage output in order to get your meatier assault units in under overwatch which helps mitigate the strengths of falling back as much as the many many existing units with fly or special ability allowances helps buff it. We just need a lot more of that kind of thing and across all the armies.
I don't think most of the complaints are that units can fall back, but that some units can fall back and still act normally or semi normally. Harlequins, Ultras, big stuff like knights, some characters, and anything with fky being the main offenders.
I think that most of this is over reaction, since we are unlikely to see any more full armies that can do this (GW won't let others be as too as the Ultras, right?), but it is something people will have to deal with at times, as it is also unlikely to ever change. Maybe whining to GW will make them change the way fall back works...but I wouldn't hold my breath.
So, I think we have to learn how to handle these lists. Harlequins are clearly the most powerful when it comes to this fall back craziness, with tau and eldar being the next biggest offenders with all that fly, and ultramarines and IG being the least offensive, since they have few vehicles that can take advantage of these rules, unlike the eldar (all kinds) or tau.
How do you handle these lists? Well, first of all, don't assault things if you can't kill them. This might mean bringing a different list if your current one has too many bad assault units in it that want to just taroit things. Shooting is an important part of the game, so I wouldnt just ignore it. Alternately, units like Khorne berzerkers, wulfen, vanguard vets etc can probably just wipe a unit out, and maybe even lock something else up. Either way its hard to be upset when that happens. And if you know a thing is going to fall back when you are done fighting it, be ready for that, or dont assault it half assed. Or, if it is infantry or an ultramarine, try to trap it with your pile in and consolidate moves. Also, try to use those moves to get into assault with other things that can't fall back. I am sure there are other things you can do as well, but I've played whole armies with fly and basically just didn't assault them, or did so knowing they would fall back.
Ultimately I think it comes down to building a list that can handle multiple threats, and playing smart. If there only think your list does is move up and assault things, it better be really good at it and wipe things out before they can get away. Otherwise, maybe your list isn't ready for 8th edition.
While I'm a huge fan of the fallback move, I do think there is definite room for assault-army-specific ways to mitigate it. What I don't think the game needs are general methods for every army to mitigate CC, considering that some of the armies in the game are very, very shooting-focused.
Granted, but at the same time the shooty-focused armies are the worst ones in assault in the first place. In any case, I was simply trying to come up with a streamlined mechanic.
Should you be heavily punished for withdrawing from melee with Tau Firewarriors? How about Necron Warriors? Imperial Guard Infantry? I think these armies have enough benefits already.
I think if the Tau player manages to charge a unit with his Fire Warriors - a unit that apparently can't hope to beat those fire warriors in melee - then there should indeed be a penalty for withdrawing. And possibly a medal for that Tau player.
Arandmoor wrote: World Eaters? I'd vastly prefer it if they got a way to penalize you from attempting to flee that was unique to them.
Probably not quite what you're looking for, but one possibility would be to roll a d6 for each model that fell back. For each roll of 6+ the unit suffers a Mortal Wound. That would be the base rule.
Then, you could add modifiers to the rule or have the unit roll extra dice. So, for example, World Eaters could force the unit add 1 to the rolls (so that the unit takes a Mortal Wound on a roll of 5+).
Some units could also modify the roll the other way. e.g. Ultramarines could reduce the roll by 1 (so they wouldn't normally take Mortal Wounds, but could still take them if fighting World Bearers with the aforementioned rule, as the modifiers would cancel out).
The only reason I dislike Fall Back is because it's a lot like all the melee-punishing rules in 7th: it weakens melee as a whole, meaning more and more melee units need bonkers rules to compete or super low cost, and it makes it feel like the melee player has no way to influence the game.
It's a lot like the complaints before overwatch existed: "Why wouldn't my units try to shoot at them as they come in? We have guns pointed right at them?"
The reason melee felt bad in 7th was that there were a lot of times when your deadly berzerk killers just stood around like doofuses and got shot. Deep strike in? Better stand around like a doofus for 30 seconds getting shot. Kill a vehicle in close combat? Stand around the wreck getting shot, no reason these guys would move after killing their target. Charge into cover? Now not only do you get shot as you charge in, they also get to attack you first.
A lot of that got fixed in 8th, but now fall back exists. After your turn is over, your hyper-fast unit of howling banshees fully engaged with the unit of incredibly slow, lumbering guardsmen stops dead in its tracks as the guardsmen just meander away, don't make any move to chase or take cover as the guardsmen stop, pick their noses for a bit, have a smoke, get an order from their commander, take careful aim, and shoot them with a full volley from their weapons.
It's a mechanic very much like getting your movement blocked by a flyer, or watching someone use 9 psychic powers on a combined unit of 10 characters to get a rerollable 2++ in 7th. The game stops being a representation of some kind of combat situation and turns into an abstraction with pieces that don't act like the things they're supposed to represent would.
What would be a better solution?
1) Attack of opportunity. Maybe a single melee attack from each model the unit is leaving, maybe they get to use all pistols they have in an immediate shooting attack, maybe a "Snap-swing" or full round of melee but hitting on a 6. Give it something analogous to Overwatch so it feels tit-for-tat.
2) some way to apply the logic of "it's these guys vs those other guys, so this would happen", like maybe a roll-off+the move stat of the falling back model. That way fast models could easily fall back from slow models, but slow models would have trouble falling back from fast models. +2 if you have Fly maybe.
3) The melee unit gets to act somehow after the fall back move takes place. Even a 3+ consolidate would help get melee units out of rapid fire range, into cover, and might in some edge cases allow the unit to chase and re-engage the unit trying to fall back. If you're running away so slowly that your models end their move only 3" away, well then maybe your attackers should catch you? This would help with the problem of the shooting army almost always having full control over where and when hand to hand combat is fought.
Luke_Prowler wrote: Funny, they didn't remove any of the things that made shooting powerful, or make it any more tactical or strategic. Shooting is a braindead as it's always been, and any expectations on intelligent unit use are being front loaded on assault armies.
I've not been religious for a long time but I'm digging your sermon.
Getting Deathwatch is like flicking the easy switch on the game, choose the right ammo, point and click and watch your opponent fail their saves.
Most shootie armies don't even get to choose between ammo types, just point and click.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm in the roll-off to escape camp.
+1 for fly and +1 for being faster is a neat idea but it doesn't help the Orks much...although I suppose having to make more rolls for theoretically being tangled with more units makes it harder to escape any unit.
Kap'n Krump wrote: Potentially, the ENTIRE guard codex (infantry units & get back in the fight orders).
You do realize that leaves the tanks and other armored vehicles, right? . Whose shooting is the heart of the AM's firepower.
And you do realize that the AM have to have officers to give those orders, and that the Company Commander can order 2 units while Lieutenant's can order one unit, right? So that it's basically impossible for all the infantry units in an army to get that fall back and shoot order in the same turn?
Please, just stop.
For 20 or 30 points, why would you ever not have enough orders for all your infantry units???
Assuming that this was in reference to our game it was more like 220. While I suppose the Guardsmen appreciate that the painted horde of them and/or their battlefield performance made it feel like 300 they were not in that range.
Since in the Index world we do not really know what GW's end game looks like with Codices to be released I am wary of saying that fall back will be broken. If ways to mitigate the disadvantages continue to spread while only a handful of units can stop it 9th should probably make some changes (I personally favor a free melee attack from each enemy model that could currently fight that you are running away from, maybe also allow a small consolidation that cannot be used to move within 1" of the enemy so they can get into cover).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
GhostRecon wrote: What are the points levels/lists involved in your example battles, OP?
Spoiler:
Back engineered from other changes over the last few weeks so possibly not 100% accurate, but something like:
2k, 3 detachments
Brigade
Company Commander x3
Command Squad with Lascannon x3
Command Squad with x4 Meltaguns
Command Squad with x3 Melta, x1 Grenade Launcher
Chimera
Scout Sentinel with Multilaser x2
Hellhound
Heavy Weapon Squad with x3 mortars x2
Heavy Weapon Squad with x3 missile launchers
Leman Russ with Eradicator nova cannon
Infantry Squad with Heavy Bolter and Plasmagun x4
Infantry Squad with Autocannon and Plasmagun x3
Battalion
Company Commander
Primaris Psyker - Gaze of the Emperor, Psychic Barrier
Tempestus Scions - x10 with x4 Plasmagun
Conscripts - x50 x2
Vanguard
Company Commander
Commissar
Sgt. Harker
Ministorum Priest
What if Falling Back was removed or made much harder, but units could shoot into combat (either with a -1 to hit or with a chance of hitting their own units)?
Kdash wrote: For 20 or 30 points, why would you ever not have enough orders for all your infantry units???
Because while 20-30pts is cheap, taking one for every 1-2 units of Infantry adds up fast. Especially when you're spending those points on units that can't really do anything on their own.
What's more, if you take enough officers to order every Infantry squad you have, then some of those officers are going to be wasted points the moment you start to lose squads.
Also, Orders just aren't that powerful. Rerolling 1s to hit on a unit that hits on 4s just isn't very strong. FRFSRK can be good but it's also rather situational. And the order you're complaining about isn't nearly as useful as you're making out. Aside from conscripts, most infantry units that get charged aren't going to have much left when your turn rolls around. Frankly, I'd much rather use my orders to buff my other squads, rather than getting a scant few survivors to fire.
Luke_Prowler wrote: Pretty much every army that wants to blows gak up down range can do it from first turn
It's a lot easier to mitigate shooting damage the entire game, than it is to mitigate Fight phase damage after a charge. For example, cover.
That's a funny joke. Cover is almost entirely useless this edition (my #2 complaint). You can see one ork boyz' elbow around the corner of a building? He and his squad gets no benefit unless the entire squad is inside, not behind, cover, and the whole squad can die. Even if, by some miracle, you manage to have the entire squad in cover, my save goes from a 6+ to a 5+, assuming you don't have save modifiers. Hurray.
Basically, the only way I get saves from shooting is to bring a KFF, which I have to do, every time.
Why, this handy trick allowed less than a handful of my guardsmen to slay a chaos terminator sorcerer warlord with their meltaguns because I had an officer nearby who reminded them that they should keep on fighting.
So yeah, this is good and really handy in the right spot. I'm sure there exists a counter to it, though.
Assuming that this was in reference to our game it was more like 220. While I suppose the Guardsmen appreciate that the painted horde of them and/or their battlefield performance made it feel like 300 they were not in that range.
Since in the Index world we do not really know what GW's end game looks like with Codices to be released I am wary of saying that fall back will be broken. If ways to mitigate the disadvantages continue to spread while only a handful of units can stop it 9th should probably make some changes (I personally favor a free melee attack from each enemy model that could currently fight that you are running away from, maybe also allow a small consolidation that cannot be used to move within 1" of the enemy so they can get into cover).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
GhostRecon wrote: What are the points levels/lists involved in your example battles, OP?
Spoiler:
Back engineered from other changes over the last few weeks so possibly not 100% accurate, but something like:
2k, 3 detachments
Brigade
Company Commander x3
Command Squad with Lascannon x3
Command Squad with x4 Meltaguns
Command Squad with x3 Melta, x1 Grenade Launcher
Chimera
Scout Sentinel with Multilaser x2
Hellhound
Heavy Weapon Squad with x3 mortars x2
Heavy Weapon Squad with x3 missile launchers
Leman Russ with Eradicator nova cannon
Infantry Squad with Heavy Bolter and Plasmagun x4
Infantry Squad with Autocannon and Plasmagun x3
Battalion
Company Commander
Primaris Psyker - Gaze of the Emperor, Psychic Barrier
Tempestus Scions - x10 with x4 Plasmagun
Conscripts - x50 x2
Vanguard
Company Commander
Commissar
Sgt. Harker
Ministorum Priest
Looks like a pretty standard IG gunline list. What was OP fielding? Fall back doesn't seem like it's the problem here. Only exacerbates what sounds more like problems with list-building or in-game tactics.
Kap'n Krump wrote: The only counter to it that I know of that exists in the entirety of the game is that you can't run from dark eldar wytches on a 4+, or something.
That's the only limitation in the entire game, apart from completely enveloping the target unit, which has been very rare in my experience.
I believe there's a Chaos special character (Daemon, IIRC) that prevents all models within a certain radius from him from falling back at all.
Looks like a pretty standard IG gunline list. What was OP fielding? Fall back doesn't seem like it's the problem here. Only exacerbates what sounds more like problems with list-building or in-game tactics.
As I recall, 3x groups of boyz, warboss, wierdboy, big mek with kff, gorkanaut, 3x deff dreads, lobbas, commandos.
It's not an ideal list, as I'm well aware that ork walkers are still awful.
But no offense, but you are completely mistaken - falling back was the exact, and only problem. I had no problem making it to combat. I had no problem killing stuff in combat. But whenever I did, either the target unit fell back with no penalty, or it was some tiny unit that fell back and everything else shot me anyways.
Example: I got off da jump on a group of boyz. They made it into combat, after braving 100 ish overwatch shots. They kill some guys, then I pile into a second group. On his turn, both units simply walked away without challenge, both turned around, and blasted me at point blank range with no penalties.
And, to an extent, this was a test game for me. But it's frustrating for me to A). Make a psychic test, B) Get shot in my own turn C) Make a 9+ charge roll, all for the opponent to simply walk away and shoot without penalty, with no rolls required. Just stroll away.
And, again, I get that falling back as a mechanic could be a useful tool for gunline armies. But it needs to not be automatic and unchallenged.
As a thought: If you fall back, I get a free round of combat, but only hit on 6s. (Like inverse overwatch - seems fair). Then we both roll a D6 and add move value. We both move our respective values. If you end your movement outside 1", you're not in combat. But I'm free to give chase or go after a new target. If that seems unfair, well consider that having your front line crumple and rout from an assault is supposed to be a bad thing. Maybe the fleeing unit gets D6 + their movement, the unit they flee from just gets their base movement.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean, adding potential damage and a random element makes falling back a lot more analogous to charging, which seems more fair to me. If charging means I have to take damage in my own turn and only have a chance of succeeding, does it not seem reasonable for the opposite of charging to have similar elements?
I, for one, am glad shooting armies participate in the game now.
I remember watching games basically ever since 5th where after turn 3 it sounded like: "Okay, your turn." "Alright, well let's go on to the assault phase..."
Because having your whole army in assault meant:
1) You didn't get to do the movement phase.
2) You didn't really get to do the psychic phase (Some powers I guess)
3) You didn't get to tdo the shooting phase
4) You didn't get to do much in the assault phase unless you were an assault unit. 10 dice hitting on 4s wounding on 5's doesn't really count - my computer can do that. I want more engagement.
Now, a shooting army can be engaged in the game even after turn 3.. *shock, horror*
As someone who mostly plays shooting armies, I've noticed it's mainly good for screwing over really expensive fragile glass cannon units, who are no longer safe when they get in close, and preventing tarpits from doing much.
It in fact removed most of the incentive for me to run CC armies, beyond one exceptionally deadly unit.
Looks like a pretty standard IG gunline list. What was OP fielding? Fall back doesn't seem like it's the problem here. Only exacerbates what sounds more like problems with list-building or in-game tactics.
As I recall, 3x groups of boyz, warboss, wierdboy, big mek with kff, gorkanaut, 3x deff dreads, lobbas, commandos.
It's not an ideal list, as I'm well aware that ork walkers are still awful.
But no offense, but you are completely mistaken - falling back was the exact, and only problem. I had no problem making it to combat. I had no problem killing stuff in combat. But whenever I did, either the target unit fell back with no penalty, or it was some tiny unit that fell back and everything else shot me anyways.
Example: I got off da jump on a group of boyz. They made it into combat, after braving 100 ish overwatch shots. They kill some guys, then I pile into a second group. On his turn, both units simply walked away without challenge, both turned around, and blasted me at point blank range with no penalties.
And, to an extent, this was a test game for me. But it's frustrating for me to A). Make a psychic test, B) Get shot in my own turn C) Make a 9+ charge roll, all for the opponent to simply walk away and shoot without penalty, with no rolls required. Just stroll away.
And, again, I get that falling back as a mechanic could be a useful tool for gunline armies. But it needs to not be automatic and unchallenged.
As a thought: If you fall back, I get a free round of combat, but only hit on 6s. (Like inverse overwatch - seems fair). Then we both roll a D6 and add move value. We both move our respective values. If you end your movement outside 1", you're not in combat. But I'm free to give chase or go after a new target. If that seems unfair, well consider that having your front line crumple and rout from an assault is supposed to be a bad thing. Maybe the fleeing unit gets D6 + their movement, the unit they flee from just gets their base movement.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean, adding potential damage and a random element makes falling back a lot more analogous to charging, which seems more fair to me. If charging means I have to take damage in my own turn and only have a chance of succeeding, does it not seem reasonable for the opposite of charging to have similar elements?
Hyperbole aside, AM can't fall back and then shoot you with no penalty. They need Orders to make it happen, and using an Order to make a unit that Fell Back means that unit can't take any other orders and the involved Company/Platoon Commander loses an Order (1 of 2 for the Company and 1 of 1 for the Platoon Commander respectively). Not to mention the pts and slot cost for said Commander(s) - not huge, yes, but it all starts to add up. 30 points for AM is 4 Plasma Guns; another 10pts and you can have a whole 'nother infantry squad on the field. It adds up, and while not massive is definitely not 'no penalty.'
Furthermore, you were definitely charging/fighting his Conscript blob from the sounds of it - which, 1) Is exactly what he wants you to do and 2) Doesn't show Fall back being the problem. Conscripts are widely considered to be overpowered thanks to their synergy with Commissars (reducing all morale-based loses to just 1 Conscript) and Orders (letting this 50-some wound blob with lasguns eat your charge and then turn around to fire in his turn). And even if Conscripts weren't OP, they really only exist to tarpit and swamp - so eating an Ork charge is exactly what they're for.
And beyond all that a key part of the problem is definitely list building in this case. Orks seem to be at the bottom of the power curve currently, while AM is near the top (if not the top) by comparison. As such, you can't afford to be less efficient if you want to fight a list that is reasonably competitive - and while your opponent's list might not be one of the hyper-OP 'true' Conscript-wave armies that people are decrying your opponent still has a list with a potent variety of firepower and durability. Of the ~2000 pts you had available, you spent some ~400-450 on the Deff Dreads alone - that's enough for about two more full-strength blobs of Orks, nearly doubling the amount of bodies you have absorbing hits. Add in a Painboy or two for the 6+ FNP and you have some 150 Boyz who all have a 16% chance to negate any wound done to them as they Advance across the board.
What would your current list do against a 'true' Green Tide force, for example? With 5-6 full Ork mobs with Painboyz and Waagh! banner buffs?
Like it or not, but until the Orks get their Codex and unless that Codex makes some strong balance changes Orks are one of the weaker forces in 8th Ed and only a few lists - such as a Green Tide list - seem to be reasonably capable.
Looks like a pretty standard IG gunline list. What was OP fielding? Fall back doesn't seem like it's the problem here. Only exacerbates what sounds more like problems with list-building or in-game tactics.
As I recall, 3x groups of boyz, warboss, wierdboy, big mek with kff, gorkanaut, 3x deff dreads, lobbas, commandos.
It's not an ideal list, as I'm well aware that ork walkers are still awful.
But no offense, but you are completely mistaken - falling back was the exact, and only problem. I had no problem making it to combat. I had no problem killing stuff in combat. But whenever I did, either the target unit fell back with no penalty, or it was some tiny unit that fell back and everything else shot me anyways.
Example: I got off da jump on a group of boyz. They made it into combat, after braving 100 ish overwatch shots. They kill some guys, then I pile into a second group. On his turn, both units simply walked away without challenge, both turned around, and blasted me at point blank range with no penalties.
So, which was it? Did the two units that fell back turn and shoot you? Or was it everything else? Because unless those two units could fly, they couldn't advance, charge, or shoot the turn they fell back. Or did he consume orders to let them shoot you instead of using them to do other things? Either way, nothing he did was "un-penalized". He paid to be able to do that.
Also, no offense, this doesn't sound like a problem. It sounds like you're just mad that you got into melee, and your opponent got to do things other than sit there and remove models while you rolled dice for four turns.
And, to an extent, this was a test game for me. But it's frustrating for me to A). Make a psychic test, B) Get shot in my own turn C) Make a 9+ charge roll, all for the opponent to simply walk away and shoot without penalty, with no rolls required. Just stroll away.
Again, there are penalties. Either your opponent was shooting with squads he should not have been shooting with, or you were charging the wrong units, or your opponent set up his force to counter yours and you got outplayed.
And, again, I get that falling back as a mechanic could be a useful tool for gunline armies. But it needs to not be automatic and unchallenged.
It's not unchallenged. You already got to punch them in the face before they sounded the retreat and gave up the option to advance, shoot, or charge in their next turn.
As a thought: If you fall back, I get a free round of combat, but only hit on 6s. (Like inverse overwatch - seems fair). Then we both roll a D6 and add move value. We both move our respective values. If you end your movement outside 1", you're not in combat. But I'm free to give chase or go after a new target. If that seems unfair, well consider that having your front line crumple and rout from an assault is supposed to be a bad thing. Maybe the fleeing unit gets D6 + their movement, the unit they flee from just gets their base movement.
Then overwatch should also reduce your charge range. If you can't justify a unit that was just charged simply up and walking away, how can you justify a unit getting shot at just up and walking into melee?
Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean, adding potential damage and a random element makes falling back a lot more analogous to charging, which seems more fair to me. If charging means I have to take damage in my own turn and only have a chance of succeeding, does it not seem reasonable for the opposite of charging to have similar elements?
The "random element" to charging can be easily removed simply by moving closer enough to your charge target that you cannot fail the charge roll.
Where's the equivilent to falling back whereby the unit that falls back cannot be charged in the next turn because they "got away"?
I know where it is. It involves getting enough of their fellow soldier pointing enough guns at the charging unit to wreck them until they break and run.
...and you want to take that away? The problem is that being able to "lock" your opponent in CC doesn't actually let the player who got charged play the game. It's not fun to get charged if you're shooting focused with CC-lock because it puts the game into an auto-pilot mode that you're going to lose.
In exchange for the removal of that auto-pilot, they eviscerated template weapons. If you want CC locking back, we could also go back to letting shooting armies completely table you first turn.
Does that sound fun? Because it's really the only other way to balance things.
I am aware that get back in the fight is an order that has to be issued. But give me a break, 30 points to give orders to 2 units is absurdly cheap. Barely more expensive than a power klaw. And it happens automatically to any squad without a test. So, while I am being a bit hyperbolic, meet me halfway and admit that it's neither difficult nor expensive to accomplish granting get back in the fight pretty much at will.
And like I said, I know that dreads are still bad, and yes, I can spam nothing but boyz squads and wierdboyz. And maybe the only answer to spam is more spam, but it's a little dull.
Looks like a pretty standard IG gunline list. What was OP fielding? Fall back doesn't seem like it's the problem here. Only exacerbates what sounds more like problems with list-building or in-game tactics.
As I recall, 3x groups of boyz, warboss, wierdboy, big mek with kff, gorkanaut, 3x deff dreads, lobbas, commandos.
It's not an ideal list, as I'm well aware that ork walkers are still awful.
But no offense, but you are completely mistaken - falling back was the exact, and only problem. I had no problem making it to combat. I had no problem killing stuff in combat. But whenever I did, either the target unit fell back with no penalty, or it was some tiny unit that fell back and everything else shot me anyways.
Example: I got off da jump on a group of boyz. They made it into combat, after braving 100 ish overwatch shots. They kill some guys, then I pile into a second group. On his turn, both units simply walked away without challenge, both turned around, and blasted me at point blank range with no penalties.
So, which was it? Did the two units that fell back turn and shoot you? Or was it everything else? Because unless those two units could fly, they couldn't advance, charge, or shoot the turn they fell back. Or did he consume orders to let them shoot you instead of using them to do other things? Either way, nothing he did was "un-penalized". He paid to be able to do that.
Also, no offense, this doesn't sound like a problem. It sounds like you're just mad that you got into melee, and your opponent got to do things other than sit there and remove models while you rolled dice for four turns.
Allways easier to get shot at than charging these rules underlines it. You really are mad assault is even possible
And, to an extent, this was a test game for me. But it's frustrating for me to A). Make a psychic test, B) Get shot in my own turn C) Make a 9+ charge roll, all for the opponent to simply walk away and shoot without penalty, with no rolls required. Just stroll away.
Again, there are penalties. Either your opponent was shooting with squads he should not have been shooting with, or you were charging the wrong units, or your opponent set up his force to counter yours and you got outplayed.
Not really a penalty when cheap screens cant shoot or charge, and its not hard to deply forcing a melee armys targets. He didnt get outplayed, he just didnt bring a shooty army, since assault armies are subpar.
And, again, I get that falling back as a mechanic could be a useful tool for gunline armies. But it needs to not be automatic and unchallenged.
It's not unchallenged. You already got to punch them in the face before they sounded the retreat and gave up the option to advance, shoot, or charge in their next turn.
Yeah punched an entire 60 points unit in the dust! REALLY STRONG!
As a thought: If you fall back, I get a free round of combat, but only hit on 6s. (Like inverse overwatch - seems fair). Then we both roll a D6 and add move value. We both move our respective values. If you end your movement outside 1", you're not in combat. But I'm free to give chase or go after a new target. If that seems unfair, well consider that having your front line crumple and rout from an assault is supposed to be a bad thing. Maybe the fleeing unit gets D6 + their movement, the unit they flee from just gets their base movement.
Then overwatch should also reduce your charge range. If you can't justify a unit that was just charged simply up and walking away, how can you justify a unit getting shot at just up and walking into melee?
Oh you would love reducing movement distance wouldn't you? How about WS too, perhaps full BS overwatch or 10 damage a shot because you are right in the line of sight?
And regarding to the unit getting shot and stil getting into melee being unrealistic in your eyes, not everyone makes it in.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean, adding potential damage and a random element makes falling back a lot more analogous to charging, which seems more fair to me. If charging means I have to take damage in my own turn and only have a chance of succeeding, does it not seem reasonable for the opposite of charging to have similar elements?
The "random element" to charging can be easily removed simply by moving closer enough to your charge target that you cannot fail the charge roll.
Where's the equivilent to falling back whereby the unit that falls back cannot be charged in the next turn because they "got away"?
I know where it is. It involves getting enough of their fellow soldier pointing enough guns at the charging unit to wreck them until they break and run.
...and you want to take that away? The problem is that being able to "lock" your opponent in CC doesn't actually let the player who got charged play the game. It's not fun to get charged if you're shooting focused with CC-lock because it puts the game into an auto-pilot mode that you're going to lose.
In exchange for the removal of that auto-pilot, they eviscerated template weapons. If you want CC locking back, we could also go back to letting shooting armies completely table you first turn.
Does that sound fun? Because it's really the only other way to balance things.
Rules prohibit getting closer than 9" in deepstrike rules, not all armies have access to first turn guaranteed charge. So what you are saying is assault armies can go back to 7th edition and get completely tabled or stay in 8th and get dominated by shooting. Neither is acceptable
Too many people forget that pile and consolidate can prevent a unit from falling back if you place the models correctly.
You cannot move if you have to move thru enemy models, you can easily trap units by piling in around them.
Flying units are pretty expensive imo, that's the balancing factor.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote: Orks have problems that are almost unrelated to this issue. Even if you could stay in combat forever, and never got shot at because your enormous units of boyz are eternally stuck in close combat, that'd still not really save Orks from being the bottom of 8th's barrel.
What? Orks are hardly bottom, and these reaction threads are exactly that....a reaction. Players still do not understand how assault works, how to manipulate the pile in and consolidate phases, remembering pistols can fire into combat, etc.
I'd be more interested from people in this thread on solutions to the issues the player seems to have then just ripping armies to shreds before we even know what is going on.
Looks like a pretty standard IG gunline list. What was OP fielding? Fall back doesn't seem like it's the problem here. Only exacerbates what sounds more like problems with list-building or in-game tactics.
As I recall, 3x groups of boyz, warboss, wierdboy, big mek with kff, gorkanaut, 3x deff dreads, lobbas, commandos.
It's not an ideal list, as I'm well aware that ork walkers are still awful.
But no offense, but you are completely mistaken - falling back was the exact, and only problem. I had no problem making it to combat. I had no problem killing stuff in combat. But whenever I did, either the target unit fell back with no penalty, or it was some tiny unit that fell back and everything else shot me anyways.
Example: I got off da jump on a group of boyz. They made it into combat, after braving 100 ish overwatch shots. They kill some guys, then I pile into a second group. On his turn, both units simply walked away without challenge, both turned around, and blasted me at point blank range with no penalties.
So, which was it? Did the two units that fell back turn and shoot you? Or was it everything else? Because unless those two units could fly, they couldn't advance, charge, or shoot the turn they fell back. Or did he consume orders to let them shoot you instead of using them to do other things? Either way, nothing he did was "un-penalized". He paid to be able to do that.
Also, no offense, this doesn't sound like a problem. It sounds like you're just mad that you got into melee, and your opponent got to do things other than sit there and remove models while you rolled dice for four turns.
Allways easier to get shot at than charging these rules underlines it. You really are mad assault is even possible
You sort of missed the point - if you made it into melee against a shooting army in prior editions, they didn't actually get to play the game. They sorta sat there, driving their tanks around making little phhhhbbbt noises, while your unit slowly blenderized everything. If it was well-planned, you could be essentially immune to the game for 4 turns. That's what he's happy doesn't happen anymore.
And, to an extent, this was a test game for me. But it's frustrating for me to A). Make a psychic test, B) Get shot in my own turn C) Make a 9+ charge roll, all for the opponent to simply walk away and shoot without penalty, with no rolls required. Just stroll away.
Again, there are penalties. Either your opponent was shooting with squads he should not have been shooting with, or you were charging the wrong units, or your opponent set up his force to counter yours and you got outplayed.
Not really a penalty when cheap screens cant shoot or charge, and its not hard to deply forcing a melee armys targets. He didnt get outplayed, he just didnt bring a shooty army, since assault armies are subpar.
Cheap screens are exactly the counter to the tactic of frontal assaults. If 'the enemy has screens' shuts down your assault army, then perhaps you need more maneuverability than 'drive forwards, disembark, charge the closest things'. It's an improvement, in my opinion, that assault armies actually have to maneuver around things like screens. The fact that there may not be enough space on a 6x4 to maneuver may be an issue, but that's table size, not tactical concept. Besides, things like outflank and deep strike mitigate it somewhat.
And, again, I get that falling back as a mechanic could be a useful tool for gunline armies. But it needs to not be automatic and unchallenged.
It's not unchallenged. You already got to punch them in the face before they sounded the retreat and gave up the option to advance, shoot, or charge in their next turn.
Yeah punched an entire 60 points unit in the dust! REALLY STRONG!
This happens less if you don't just blitz into the first cheap throwaway unit you see and expect to win the game. Charging conscripts or the like is literally what they're for. You're doing them a favour.
As a thought: If you fall back, I get a free round of combat, but only hit on 6s. (Like inverse overwatch - seems fair). Then we both roll a D6 and add move value. We both move our respective values. If you end your movement outside 1", you're not in combat. But I'm free to give chase or go after a new target. If that seems unfair, well consider that having your front line crumple and rout from an assault is supposed to be a bad thing. Maybe the fleeing unit gets D6 + their movement, the unit they flee from just gets their base movement.
Then overwatch should also reduce your charge range. If you can't justify a unit that was just charged simply up and walking away, how can you justify a unit getting shot at just up and walking into melee?
Oh you would love reducing movement distance wouldn't you? How about WS too, perhaps full BS overwatch or 10 damage a shot because you are right in the line of sight? And regarding to the unit getting shot and stil getting into melee being unrealistic in your eyes, not everyone makes it in.
I don't know if you're making enough of a point here to counterpoint, but actually I think your first point is invalid: having your front line crumple and rout from an assault is actually a perfectly normal thing. Screening units / pickets / forward positions warning of an impending assault are always a thing. If you charge the enemy's front line and they break off: congratulations, you just drove back their picket line. Now the real battle begins. I don't know why that's upsetting? Or unrealistic?
Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean, adding potential damage and a random element makes falling back a lot more analogous to charging, which seems more fair to me. If charging means I have to take damage in my own turn and only have a chance of succeeding, does it not seem reasonable for the opposite of charging to have similar elements?
The "random element" to charging can be easily removed simply by moving closer enough to your charge target that you cannot fail the charge roll.
Where's the equivilent to falling back whereby the unit that falls back cannot be charged in the next turn because they "got away"?
I know where it is. It involves getting enough of their fellow soldier pointing enough guns at the charging unit to wreck them until they break and run.
...and you want to take that away? The problem is that being able to "lock" your opponent in CC doesn't actually let the player who got charged play the game. It's not fun to get charged if you're shooting focused with CC-lock because it puts the game into an auto-pilot mode that you're going to lose.
In exchange for the removal of that auto-pilot, they eviscerated template weapons. If you want CC locking back, we could also go back to letting shooting armies completely table you first turn.
Does that sound fun? Because it's really the only other way to balance things.
Rules prohibit getting closer than 9" in deepstrike rules, not all armies have access to first turn guaranteed charge. So what you are saying is assault armies can go back to 7th edition and get completely tabled or stay in 8th and get dominated by shooting. Neither is acceptable
With command point re-rolls, armies absolutely can get first turn charges. Bring enough deep-strikers (say, 3) and you're guaranteed to get one in. And not all assault armies have access to first turn charges - the only one I can think of is pure Khorne Berzerkers. Orks have Da Jump, Tyranids have the Swarmlord, Sisters have Acts of Faith, and most others can deepstrike.
Looks like a pretty standard IG gunline list. What was OP fielding? Fall back doesn't seem like it's the problem here. Only exacerbates what sounds more like problems with list-building or in-game tactics.
As I recall, 3x groups of boyz, warboss, wierdboy, big mek with kff, gorkanaut, 3x deff dreads, lobbas, commandos.
It's not an ideal list, as I'm well aware that ork walkers are still awful.
But no offense, but you are completely mistaken - falling back was the exact, and only problem. I had no problem making it to combat. I had no problem killing stuff in combat. But whenever I did, either the target unit fell back with no penalty, or it was some tiny unit that fell back and everything else shot me anyways.
Example: I got off da jump on a group of boyz. They made it into combat, after braving 100 ish overwatch shots. They kill some guys, then I pile into a second group. On his turn, both units simply walked away without challenge, both turned around, and blasted me at point blank range with no penalties.
So, which was it? Did the two units that fell back turn and shoot you? Or was it everything else? Because unless those two units could fly, they couldn't advance, charge, or shoot the turn they fell back. Or did he consume orders to let them shoot you instead of using them to do other things? Either way, nothing he did was "un-penalized". He paid to be able to do that.
Also, no offense, this doesn't sound like a problem. It sounds like you're just mad that you got into melee, and your opponent got to do things other than sit there and remove models while you rolled dice for four turns.
Allways easier to get shot at than charging these rules underlines it. You really are mad assault is even possible
You sort of missed the point - if you made it into melee against a shooting army in prior editions, they didn't actually get to play the game. They sorta sat there, driving their tanks around making little phhhhbbbt noises, while your unit slowly blenderized everything. If it was well-planned, you could be essentially immune to the game for 4 turns. That's what he's happy doesn't happen anymore.
And now shooting armys can become immune by screening, move out of combat focus fire with entire army. There needs to be some penalty/danger/chance for leaving combat,
but as it is now, most melee armies got a harder time.
And, to an extent, this was a test game for me. But it's frustrating for me to A). Make a psychic test, B) Get shot in my own turn C) Make a 9+ charge roll, all for the opponent to simply walk away and shoot without penalty, with no rolls required. Just stroll away.
Again, there are penalties. Either your opponent was shooting with squads he should not have been shooting with, or you were charging the wrong units, or your opponent set up his force to counter yours and you got outplayed.
Not really a penalty when cheap screens cant shoot or charge, and its not hard to deply forcing a melee armys targets. He didnt get outplayed, he just didnt bring a shooty army, since assault armies are subpar.
Cheap screens are exactly the counter to the tactic of frontal assaults. If 'the enemy has screens' shuts down your assault army, then perhaps you need more maneuverability than 'drive forwards, disembark, charge the closest things'. It's an improvement, in my opinion, that assault armies actually have to maneuver around things like screens. The fact that there may not be enough space on a 6x4 to maneuver may be an issue, but that's table size, not tactical concept. Besides, things like outflank and deep strike mitigate it somewhat.
And what mobility is that? Its easy to shut down drop zones with sceening. And that said i dont mind screens, but them being another turn of guaranteed shooting against the melee army is not OK. So again my empathis is that its not really a penalty for the shooty army when his cheap sceens cant shoot but the entire army can.
And, again, I get that falling back as a mechanic could be a useful tool for gunline armies. But it needs to not be automatic and unchallenged.
It's not unchallenged. You already got to punch them in the face before they sounded the retreat and gave up the option to advance, shoot, or charge in their next turn.
Yeah punched an entire 60 points unit in the dust! REALLY STRONG!
This happens less if you don't just blitz into the first cheap throwaway unit you see and expect to win the game. Charging conscripts or the like is literally what they're for. You're doing them a favour.
Im doing shooting armys a favor by fielding a melee army per the rules as they stand
As a thought: If you fall back, I get a free round of combat, but only hit on 6s. (Like inverse overwatch - seems fair). Then we both roll a D6 and add move value. We both move our respective values. If you end your movement outside 1", you're not in combat. But I'm free to give chase or go after a new target. If that seems unfair, well consider that having your front line crumple and rout from an assault is supposed to be a bad thing. Maybe the fleeing unit gets D6 + their movement, the unit they flee from just gets their base movement.
Then overwatch should also reduce your charge range. If you can't justify a unit that was just charged simply up and walking away, how can you justify a unit getting shot at just up and walking into melee?
Oh you would love reducing movement distance wouldn't you? How about WS too, perhaps full BS overwatch or 10 damage a shot because you are right in the line of sight?
And regarding to the unit getting shot and stil getting into melee being unrealistic in your eyes, not everyone makes it in.
I don't know if you're making enough of a point here to counterpoint, but actually I think your first point is invalid: having your front line crumple and rout from an assault is actually a perfectly normal thing. Screening units / pickets / forward positions warning of an impending assault are always a thing. If you charge the enemy's front line and they break off: congratulations, you just drove back their picket line. Now the real battle begins. I don't know why that's upsetting? Or unrealistic?
In your explanation i understand what you are saying, but in 40k we have to adhere by the 2" apart rule when you are a unit. But what you are trying to say is that it dosent matter if you charge on bikes, foot or whatever, because somehow in an abstract vision your unit is split apart but not represented on the table. Its a game with frekin plastic models, just make it fair for both sides, thats ALL i ask.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean, adding potential damage and a random element makes falling back a lot more analogous to charging, which seems more fair to me. If charging means I have to take damage in my own turn and only have a chance of succeeding, does it not seem reasonable for the opposite of charging to have similar elements?
The "random element" to charging can be easily removed simply by moving closer enough to your charge target that you cannot fail the charge roll.
Where's the equivilent to falling back whereby the unit that falls back cannot be charged in the next turn because they "got away"?
I know where it is. It involves getting enough of their fellow soldier pointing enough guns at the charging unit to wreck them until they break and run.
...and you want to take that away? The problem is that being able to "lock" your opponent in CC doesn't actually let the player who got charged play the game. It's not fun to get charged if you're shooting focused with CC-lock because it puts the game into an auto-pilot mode that you're going to lose.
In exchange for the removal of that auto-pilot, they eviscerated template weapons. If you want CC locking back, we could also go back to letting shooting armies completely table you first turn.
Does that sound fun? Because it's really the only other way to balance things.
Rules prohibit getting closer than 9" in deepstrike rules, not all armies have access to first turn guaranteed charge. So what you are saying is assault armies can go back to 7th edition and get completely tabled or stay in 8th and get dominated by shooting. Neither is acceptable
With command point re-rolls, armies absolutely can get first turn charges. Bring enough deep-strikers (say, 3) and you're guaranteed to get one in. And not all assault armies have access to first turn charges - the only one I can think of is pure Khorne Berzerkers. Orks have Da Jump, Tyranids have the Swarmlord, Sisters have Acts of Faith, and most others can deepstrike.
Yeah i CAN get first turn charges by deepstrike, not garanteed by any means! But its garanteed that im gonna get shot to bits against a shooting opponent with just abit of sensebility and especially if i deep striked within rapid fire and failed my charge.
Actually, fun fact relevant to this thread: You don't actually need to completely encircle a squad to stop them falling back, you just need to have enough models encircled/entrapped that they can't get away. It's easier to accomplish than you'd think with an infantry assault, especially if you encircle special characters or heavy/special weapons your opponent is less likely to remove as casualties.
the_scotsman wrote: Actually, fun fact relevant to this thread: You don't actually need to completely encircle a squad to stop them falling back, you just need to have enough models encircled/entrapped that they can't get away. It's easier to accomplish than you'd think with an infantry assault, especially if you encircle special characters or heavy/special weapons your opponent is less likely to remove as casualties.
Indeed.
Simply encircling one model from a unit means the whole unit cannot fall back.
IMHO even if I myself play almost full melee Orks, I find the fallback rule a really good idea. We have no more to endure boring 4 turns H2H. It's true that it's more of an advantage for shooty army, but I'm pretty sure even melee army will have some use for this.
As I see it, sure it forces me to thinik carrefully during my movement/charge phases, but I see it as a good thing plus it opens interesting possibilities.
As it is, I'm much more frustrated by overwatch which I feel does not make any sense (why can you shot twice only if you are charged ? why only overwatch shot ? why not psychic overwatch ? movement overwatch ? counter charge ?) but it's for another debate and I guess we are all too much accustomed to it.
That's a funny joke. Cover is almost entirely useless this edition (my #2 complaint). You can see one ork boyz' elbow around the corner of a building? He and his squad gets no benefit unless the entire squad is inside, not behind, cover, and the whole squad can die. Even if, by some miracle, you manage to have the entire squad in cover, my save goes from a 6+ to a 5+, assuming you don't have save modifiers. Hurray.
Basically, the only way I get saves from shooting is to bring a KFF, which I have to do, every time.
Which part of the cover rules don't work as above? Because, per the faq:
"For example, units gain the benefit of cover if every model in the unit is either on or within terrain. So long as all the models in that unit are either on or partially within the terrain, they gain the benefit of cover."
Additionally, while I can allocate wounds to any model in a unit, it doesn't have to be within LOS or range of the attackers, that's right out of the rulebook.
If cover doesn't work like this, I would like to know how it does.
The only type of cover that protects a unit not wholly within it are barricades, to my knowledge.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be wrong on this, but I don't see how I am, per the rulebook and FAQ.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stormonu wrote: How about a reverse overwatch? If a unit falls back, melee opponents get free round of attacks, that only hit on a 6?
Yeah, I think that would be fair. I still think there should be some test to outrun me too, but I think if I have to take potential damage on the way in, you should take some on the way out.
Kap'n Krump wrote: Which part of the cover rules don't work as above? Because, per the faq:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stormonu wrote: How about a reverse overwatch? If a unit falls back, melee opponents get free round of attacks, that only hit on a 6?
Yeah, I think that would be fair. I still think there should be some test to outrun me too, but I think if I have to take potential damage on the way in, you should take some on the way out.
I would like something like this. Penalties for both sounds fair (appreciate that this would require lots of play testing for an actual rule change).
For now much more strategy is required if you're a melee based army and a shooting based army I feel is very simple.
Kap'n Krump wrote: "For example, units gain the benefit of cover if every model in the unit is either on or within terrain. So long as all the models in that unit are either on or partially within the terrain, they gain the benefit of cover."
This doesn't say "you only get cover bonuses if your entire squad is completely obscured by the terrain", no matter how much you try to tell yourself it does. You need to be on, partially on, within, or partially within the terrain. Even just the slightest bit of your model's base touching the terrain would count, because you're on or partially within the terrain. So you have a squad of boyz that's mostly inside of hte building, but because not all of them fit in it, a few of them are outside behind it, their bases touching the building. They would be ON that terrain piece, or partially within it. They get cover.
It's only TFGs that try to argue cover never works in 8th.
(amusingly, this entire debate doesn't count for the Aegis Defense Line, which merely requires you to be within 1" of it on the other side of the line from the shooter)
Well it is interesting though that if you have 1 model that isn't touching the tiny lip of a baseless ruins building, the entire squad doesn't get cover.
GW needs to do a better job writing cover rules for 8th, for specific terrain pieces that they sell, specifically those without bases.
Marmatag wrote: Well it is interesting though that if you have 1 model that isn't touching the tiny lip of a baseless ruins building, the entire squad doesn't get cover.
GW needs to do a better job writing cover rules for 8th, for specific terrain pieces that they sell, specifically those without bases.
In theory, yes.
In practice, you just...remove that guy first, and then you get cover for the rest of the squad because magically, NOW the entire squad is in cover.
Kap'n Krump wrote: "For example, units gain the benefit of cover if every model in the unit is either on or within terrain. So long as all the models in that unit are either on or partially within the terrain, they gain the benefit of cover."
This doesn't say "you only get cover bonuses if your entire squad is completely obscured by the terrain", no matter how much you try to tell yourself it does. You need to be on, partially on, within, or partially within the terrain. Even just the slightest bit of your model's base touching the terrain would count, because you're on or partially within the terrain. So you have a squad of boyz that's mostly inside of hte building, but because not all of them fit in it, a few of them are outside behind it, their bases touching the building. They would be ON that terrain piece, or partially within it. They get cover.
It's only TFGs that try to argue cover never works in 8th.
(amusingly, this entire debate doesn't count for the Aegis Defense Line, which merely requires you to be within 1" of it on the other side of the line from the shooter)
I completely agree with you, infantry doesn't have to be obscured to gain cover, they have to all be inside cover.
That's the entire problem, in my opinion. It's pretty difficult to get 30 guys all within one piece of cover at all times, in my experience. And the fact that shooting through terrain confers no bonus like last edition still seems off to me.
And even though this irks me slightly, the benefits for cover are (generally, for my army) so miniscule that it's mostly a non-issue.
And yes, I know you can kill off the guys outside cover first so that the remainder is in cover. I've found that too to largely be unhelpful.
nekooni wrote: As an IG player I can tell you that * Infantry is a meat shield to block your melee units from getting to my tanks and artillery * when my infantry falls back, I have to get out of melee range. On an open field? sure, no problem - but if those guardsmen are with their backs against my artillery, that's an issue. * Only my infantry can get back in the fight and shoot after falling back. My tanks and artillery will be useless once you've broken through. * even for infantry falling back has it's downside - I cant order them to do anything else , eg reroll 1s toHit.
Have you actually played against any of the armies you're complaining about yet? I'm asking because as an IG player it's not easy to keep you off of my guys. I've got no clue what's good in your index, but I know you have transports, I know you have bikes and I know that you have stuff that can deepstrike. It's just no longer the case that once you're within charge range you just tear my guard apart without any opposition.
Our transports are crap this edition. A trukk costs more then the squad it transports and once it gets its squad to its destination its just a 80+pt lump of plastic that doesn't do much.
We also have Battlewagons which are nice and shiny and also cost more then the unit they are supposed to be transporting, the upside is the BW gets a Deff Rolla which doesn't suck, but definitly not worth the price tag.
Bikers? Our bikers lost durability this edition and went up in price 50% We gained 2inches of movement but again we can't advance and charge so those 2 inches aren't worth much except to get those dakka gunz in range, which btw are now too expensive to spam. (1 Razorback w/Twin AC is equivalent to 4 Warbikers in dakka and the warbikers are more expensive and less durable, have no AP value on weapons)
We do have units that can Deep strike. We have Kommandos who are boyz with +1 to cover, and who can take 2 burnas for free. They can't actually hurt anything usually but they do a nice job of distracting opponents who are scared of them. We also have Deff Koptas which I love but who are dramatically over priced for what little they can do. (No point equipping Twin rokkitz since they cost 28pts this edition instead of being free) We also have Warbuggies/Trakks and Skorchas which do the same thing as Koptas but worse.
We also completely lack Dakka almost across the board and we have next to nothing for anti-flyer and Anti-tank weaponry. Our answer to almost every problem in this edition is CC, and right now we have a hard time even getting into CC with our blobs and when we do our opponent runs away and shoots that unit off the table.
nekooni wrote: As an IG player I can tell you that
* Infantry is a meat shield to block your melee units from getting to my tanks and artillery
* when my infantry falls back, I have to get out of melee range. On an open field? sure, no problem - but if those guardsmen are with their backs against my artillery, that's an issue.
* Only my infantry can get back in the fight and shoot after falling back. My tanks and artillery will be useless once you've broken through.
* even for infantry falling back has it's downside - I cant order them to do anything else , eg reroll 1s toHit.
Have you actually played against any of the armies you're complaining about yet? I'm asking because as an IG player it's not easy to keep you off of my guys. I've got no clue what's good in your index, but I know you have transports, I know you have bikes and I know that you have stuff that can deepstrike. It's just no longer the case that once you're within charge range you just tear my guard apart without any opposition.
Our transports are crap this edition. A trukk costs more then the squad it transports and once it gets its squad to its destination its just a 80+pt lump of plastic that doesn't do much.
We also have Battlewagons which are nice and shiny and also cost more then the unit they are supposed to be transporting, the upside is the BW gets a Deff Rolla which doesn't suck, but definitly not worth the price tag.
Bikers? Our bikers lost durability this edition and went up in price 50% We gained 2inches of movement but again we can't advance and charge so those 2 inches aren't worth much except to get those dakka gunz in range, which btw are now too expensive to spam. (1 Razorback w/Twin AC is equivalent to 4 Warbikers in dakka and the warbikers are more expensive and less durable, have no AP value on weapons)
We do have units that can Deep strike. We have Kommandos who are boyz with +1 to cover, and who can take 2 burnas for free. They can't actually hurt anything usually but they do a nice job of distracting opponents who are scared of them. We also have Deff Koptas which I love but who are dramatically over priced for what little they can do. (No point equipping Twin rokkitz since they cost 28pts this edition instead of being free) We also have Warbuggies/Trakks and Skorchas which do the same thing as Koptas but worse.
We also completely lack Dakka almost across the board and we have next to nothing for anti-flyer and Anti-tank weaponry. Our answer to almost every problem in this edition is CC, and right now we have a hard time even getting into CC with our blobs and when we do our opponent runs away and shoots that unit off the table.
All transports cost more than the squad they are carrying this edition and are you unaware that vechicles can charge, that is hardly useless. Also, all bikes lost jinks but I don't consider gaining an extra wound a loss in durability. With your commandos you can now charge with them making them way more usfull in 8th. Also wtf do you mean you dont have AT weapons, do tankbustas or lootas not count?
nekooni wrote: As an IG player I can tell you that
* Infantry is a meat shield to block your melee units from getting to my tanks and artillery
* when my infantry falls back, I have to get out of melee range. On an open field? sure, no problem - but if those guardsmen are with their backs against my artillery, that's an issue.
* Only my infantry can get back in the fight and shoot after falling back. My tanks and artillery will be useless once you've broken through.
* even for infantry falling back has it's downside - I cant order them to do anything else , eg reroll 1s toHit.
Have you actually played against any of the armies you're complaining about yet? I'm asking because as an IG player it's not easy to keep you off of my guys. I've got no clue what's good in your index, but I know you have transports, I know you have bikes and I know that you have stuff that can deepstrike. It's just no longer the case that once you're within charge range you just tear my guard apart without any opposition.
Our transports are crap this edition. A trukk costs more then the squad it transports and once it gets its squad to its destination its just a 80+pt lump of plastic that doesn't do much.
We also have Battlewagons which are nice and shiny and also cost more then the unit they are supposed to be transporting, the upside is the BW gets a Deff Rolla which doesn't suck, but definitly not worth the price tag.
Bikers? Our bikers lost durability this edition and went up in price 50% We gained 2inches of movement but again we can't advance and charge so those 2 inches aren't worth much except to get those dakka gunz in range, which btw are now too expensive to spam. (1 Razorback w/Twin AC is equivalent to 4 Warbikers in dakka and the warbikers are more expensive and less durable, have no AP value on weapons)
We do have units that can Deep strike. We have Kommandos who are boyz with +1 to cover, and who can take 2 burnas for free. They can't actually hurt anything usually but they do a nice job of distracting opponents who are scared of them. We also have Deff Koptas which I love but who are dramatically over priced for what little they can do. (No point equipping Twin rokkitz since they cost 28pts this edition instead of being free) We also have Warbuggies/Trakks and Skorchas which do the same thing as Koptas but worse.
We also completely lack Dakka almost across the board and we have next to nothing for anti-flyer and Anti-tank weaponry. Our answer to almost every problem in this edition is CC, and right now we have a hard time even getting into CC with our blobs and when we do our opponent runs away and shoots that unit off the table.
It's base cost 75, 3 strength 7 attacks, the shoota or the rokkit, it's open topped, and it can eat overwatch shots for you. Maybe it's a little over priced, but not much. Dont discount open topped. It can even carry jump infantry or meganobs. It's only 84 points with the shoota and wreckin ball. The rhino costs 70 points bare, and is clearly inferior to the trunk in my opinion. What do you think it should be dropped to?
Tau player here, I have been so underwhelmed with overwatch (despite whole detachments doing it together and taking rerolls to misses) that I'd be totally ok with doing an inverse overwatch when falling back on the condition that tidewall models aren't autohit by inverse overwatch. I agree that giving orders to shoot after falling back is a strategic option in both list building and on the field choice so it should stay the same. Fly should also stay the same as its expensive and necessary tactic for things like crisis suits, and speed should not be more of a hindrance than it already is for the slow.
All models within 1" of an enemy unit that is using the fall back maneuver can make all of their melee attacks, up to once per turn, hitting on 6 regardless of modifiers. Models in a unit doing so may choose to shoot a pistol targeting the same unit but may not make close combat attacks.
That way if you have 30 boys around my 10 fire warriors and you wiff all of your attacks and don't surround me you can, on my turn as I fall back with darkstride's assistance, get lets say 15 boys with choppas and 15 boys with sluggas to shoot. That's an average of (15boys*3attacks*(1/6hit)*(2/3wound)*(1/2 armor save)=2 wounds of 1 damage each for choppas and (15boys * 1 attack * (1/6hit)*(2/3wound)*(1/2 armor) is 1 more damage. That's 3 fewer fire warriors shooting at you on their turn, maybe. If you had 2 units tied up I'd only be able to order one out while the other stands dumbfounded and out of breath at their retreat. Pitty the fool who brought shootas.
The thing is, if you killed a unit outright you'd still be standing in the middle of nowhere getting shot at by the rest of my army unless you consolidated onto innocent bystanders that don't get overwatch. It's BSIMO that assaulters get to move, sometimes advance (cough tyranids with +1adv and charge) and charge d6 then also move 3 then move 6 again. Now that unit that got consolidated onto has to forfeit a turn if it doesn't fly or equivalent even though it didn't do combat at all. But go ahead and take inverse overwatch, that's doable. Full combat isn't because it takes too long, movement tests could punish the wrong units, and leadership has enough function already.
Oh and the thing that anecdotally ground my gears (fairly unrelated) was that I had a model surrounded in melee by nurglings, and my whole army wasn't allowed to shoot at his warlord standing completely out in the open with no nearby units. I wasn't allowed to shoot him or the nurglings, only pile in and throw terrible punches. It sucked.
Brutallica wrote: Space Wolves melee army, im frustrated about it. I get shot to peices quite brutally.
So i figured, lets celebrate 8th editions "love for close combat" by getting myself a tank division for my space wolves. Well played GW, more money in your pocket.
If you're a true Vlka Fenryka you'll pull yourself up, and not whine like a bloody smurf. Getting shot to crap? Bring some fire support, we don't just spam wulfen and thunderwolves anymore. All my wins in 8th have not had a single wulfen or thundercalv unit. Yes I do bring melee heavy things as well.
Anyway, OP
I'm not frustrated, it's a mechanic of the game and I enjoy it. With how the rules and army lists are it's fine. You say things are negating it, however there are things that will prevent it. In AoS (8th edition's foundation, if you will) there are rules that prevent people from running away and im 100% sure they're going to add those into the game in some shape or form that an enemy cannot retreat from combat.
Kap'n Krump wrote: Which part of the cover rules don't work as above? Because, per the faq:
"For example, units gain the benefit of cover if every model in the unit is either on or within terrain. So long as all the models in that unit are either on or partially within the terrain, they gain the benefit of cover."
Additionally, while I can allocate wounds to any model in a unit, it doesn't have to be within LOS or range of the attackers, that's right out of the rulebook.
If cover doesn't work like this, I would like to know how it does.
It helps the unit once those models that are not in cover have been removed.
You have 20 boys, 18 of them are in cover. There is no cover until two are removed, then the cover kicks in,
Brutallica wrote: Space Wolves melee army, im frustrated about it. I get shot to peices quite brutally.
So i figured, lets celebrate 8th editions "love for close combat" by getting myself a tank division for my space wolves. Well played GW, more money in your pocket.
If you're a true Vlka Fenryka you'll pull yourself up, and not whine like a bloody smurf. Getting shot to crap? Bring some fire support, we don't just spam wulfen and thunderwolves anymore. All my wins in 8th have not had a single wulfen or thundercalv unit. Yes I do bring melee heavy things as well.
Anyway, OP
I'm not frustrated, it's a mechanic of the game and I enjoy it. With how the rules and army lists are it's fine. You say things are negating it, however there are things that will prevent it. In AoS (8th edition's foundation, if you will) there are rules that prevent people from running away and im 100% sure they're going to add those into the game in some shape or form that an enemy cannot retreat from combat.
If im a true Vlka Fenryka, im gonna goddamn voice my oppinion about close combat being inferior to shooting and not be censored by some Tau sympathisers!
And i got plenty of fire support to go around in my lists. While i enjoy outshooting my opponents, id also like the option to be a more dedicated melee army wich is where the Wolves belong.
The issue is that it makes bad assault units worse. It means assault units have to destroy whatever they hit in one round and preferably have a turn one charge.
Yes a unit may not be able to shoot after it falls back but if the alternative was staying in a massively one sided assault where they would suffer a lot more casualties that isnt a real cost. Being able to shoot the assaulting unit with other units is a considerable advantage. Most of the time it seems a no-brainer.
I don't think I'd object to a free single attack made on a 6 if people disengaged. It would actually mean that things like power fists and thunderhammers would be unable to hit, unless you have a +1, but I'm okay with that.
Tyel wrote: The issue is that it makes bad assault units worse. It means assault units have to destroy whatever they hit in one round and preferably have a turn one charge.
Yes a unit may not be able to shoot after it falls back but if the alternative was staying in a massively one sided assault where they would suffer a lot more casualties that isnt a real cost. Being able to shoot the assaulting unit with other units is a considerable advantage. Most of the time it seems a no-brainer.
I really haven't had a problem going for mostly turn 2 assaults with my DE. The only thing that tries on my turn is the Mandrakes as kind of a "why not" to see if I get the 9" charge on a vehicle or something.
Usually against a mostly shooty army i lose a transport or two and then the rest of my army charges the next turn with my surviving vehicles tanking overwatch and I can get most of the opposing force tied up in combat. Fall back is usually not much of a concern at that point.
the_scotsman wrote: Actually, fun fact relevant to this thread: You don't actually need to completely encircle a squad to stop them falling back, you just need to have enough models encircled/entrapped that they can't get away. It's easier to accomplish than you'd think with an infantry assault, especially if you encircle special characters or heavy/special weapons your opponent is less likely to remove as casualties.
Indeed.
Simply encircling one model from a unit means the whole unit cannot fall back.
This bears repeating again. 3" of pile-in followed by 3" of consolidation makes it fairly easy to leave at least one enemy model without a base-width route out of combat. Then it's only Harlequins and units with Fly that get to fall back out of the combat.
All transports cost more than the squad they are carrying this edition and are you unaware that vechicles can charge, that is hardly useless. Also, all bikes lost jinks but I don't consider gaining an extra wound a loss in durability. With your commandos you can now charge with them making them way more usfull in 8th. Also wtf do you mean you dont have AT weapons, do tankbustas or lootas not count?
Rhinos cost 70pts, they are designed to transport 10 Marines usually. 10 Marines cost 130pts without upgrades.
Trukkz Cost 82pts were originally designed for TrukkBoyz, 11boyz and a Nob. That costs 72pts without upgrades.
I am well aware that Trukkz and other vehicles can charge, which is why I specifically pointed out that the Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla isn't terrible, just not points effective.
I am further aware that all Bikes lost Jink, But giving them +1 wounds does not make them as or more durable. Last edition warbikers would have a 4+ jink OR a 3+ and in some cases a 2+ Jink. On turn 1 if you had skilled rider, Night fighting or were able to turbo-boost you had a 3+ or better Jink save. If that Warbike unit got hit by a bunch of Autocannon shots, lets say 8, 6+ would wound and against that 3+ save you would lose 2 models at most, if you had the 2+ it would be 1. Now? Those same warbikers get hit by 8 Autocannon shots they are getting wounded now by 6ish and with a -1 AP modifier and 2 damage base...well that 4+ save just became a 5+ so those 6 wounds now just killed 4 bikers. So yeah, I would say they lost durability.
Kommandos definitely got a buff, just not a big enough one. +1 to cover saves sounds nice but keep in mind you have to deploy them in cover 1st turn which means you probably won't be getting a charge off to get that bonus, and if you deploy them in the open to get that charge you have a slightly better then 50/50 to get the charge off. If you do get the charge off 10 marines in rapid fire range will kill 1-2 Kommandos on average from overwatch, leaving you with 2 Burnas and a Nob to take on that squad, don't get me wrong I like this and use this but it isn't all that great.
Finally, Anti-Tank. For starters you have to keep Tank bustas and Lootas inside a trukk or wagon this edition because cover doesn't do as much as it used to for them and with 6+ saves and relatively high costs for those weapons it means you are going to die if left out of a vehicle. So for starters lets tack on another 80pts for the cost of the Trukk they are required to take. Next lets see what good they are against vehicles. 12 Lootas crammed into a trukk average 24 shots, 8 hits and against T6/7/8 they get 6, 4 and 2 wounds. They have -1 AP so those 2+ and 3+ saves become 3+ and 4+. which means on average against 6 wounds they will cause 2-3 wounds causing 4-6 damage. Against T7 they cause 1-2 wounds resulting in 2-4 damage and against T8 they cause 0-1 wounds causing 0-2 damage. How much do 12 lootas in a trukk cost? 286pts. Does that damage output seem worth 286pts?
What about Tank Bustas? First off, they REALLY require a trukk because they have short ranged weapons. So lets Cram 12 into a Trukk ( I am not going to talk about Squig Bombs) If they get into range lets see how they do against T6-8 vehicles (not MCs) Tank bustas get rerolls to hit against Vehicles keep that in mind. So 12 Tankbustas will hit 4 times with the first batch and 2-3 times with the 2nd Total of 6-7 hits. Versus Toughness 6/7/8 vehicles that is 4/3/2 wounds respectively, against those 2+ and 3+ saves they become 4+ and 5+ (-2AP) Toughness 6 gets 2 and 3 wounds causing 6-9 Damage Toughness 7 gets 1-2 wounds causing 3-6 Damage and T8 gets 1-2 wounds causing 3-6 Damage. Cost of those Tankbustas in a Trukk? 286pts as well.
So yeah I will stick with my initial comment that Orkz lack Anti-Tank weapons out side of CC.
nekooni wrote: As an IG player I can tell you that
* Infantry is a meat shield to block your melee units from getting to my tanks and artillery
* when my infantry falls back, I have to get out of melee range. On an open field? sure, no problem - but if those guardsmen are with their backs against my artillery, that's an issue.
* Only my infantry can get back in the fight and shoot after falling back. My tanks and artillery will be useless once you've broken through.
* even for infantry falling back has it's downside - I cant order them to do anything else , eg reroll 1s toHit.
Have you actually played against any of the armies you're complaining about yet? I'm asking because as an IG player it's not easy to keep you off of my guys. I've got no clue what's good in your index, but I know you have transports, I know you have bikes and I know that you have stuff that can deepstrike. It's just no longer the case that once you're within charge range you just tear my guard apart without any opposition.
Our transports are crap this edition. A trukk costs more then the squad it transports and once it gets its squad to its destination its just a 80+pt lump of plastic that doesn't do much.
We also have Battlewagons which are nice and shiny and also cost more then the unit they are supposed to be transporting, the upside is the BW gets a Deff Rolla which doesn't suck, but definitly not worth the price tag.
Bikers? Our bikers lost durability this edition and went up in price 50% We gained 2inches of movement but again we can't advance and charge so those 2 inches aren't worth much except to get those dakka gunz in range, which btw are now too expensive to spam. (1 Razorback w/Twin AC is equivalent to 4 Warbikers in dakka and the warbikers are more expensive and less durable, have no AP value on weapons)
We do have units that can Deep strike. We have Kommandos who are boyz with +1 to cover, and who can take 2 burnas for free. They can't actually hurt anything usually but they do a nice job of distracting opponents who are scared of them. We also have Deff Koptas which I love but who are dramatically over priced for what little they can do. (No point equipping Twin rokkitz since they cost 28pts this edition instead of being free) We also have Warbuggies/Trakks and Skorchas which do the same thing as Koptas but worse.
We also completely lack Dakka almost across the board and we have next to nothing for anti-flyer and Anti-tank weaponry. Our answer to almost every problem in this edition is CC, and right now we have a hard time even getting into CC with our blobs and when we do our opponent runs away and shoots that unit off the table.
It's base cost 75, 3 strength 7 attacks, the shoota or the rokkit, it's open topped, and it can eat overwatch shots for you. Maybe it's a little over priced, but not much. Dont discount open topped. It can even carry jump infantry or meganobs. It's only 84 points with the shoota and wreckin ball. The rhino costs 70 points bare, and is clearly inferior to the trunk in my opinion. What do you think it should be dropped to?
Open topped is useless for anything except shooting out of, and Orkz SUCK at shooting. Just look up to my breakdown of Lootas/Tankbustas to see that proven. Yes it has 3 attacks but it has WS5 so those S7 wrecking ball attacks will hit 1 time on average, and versus T4 that averages .66wounds w/-1AP which means versus Marines you will statisticaly kill .33Marines a turn with it...As for the Shoota/Rokkit? Well the shoota is 6pts and fires 3 shots at S5 which averages again 1 hit and versus T4 thats .66 wounds and against 3+ saves thats .22 Dead Marines a turn......With the Rokkit it will hit 1/3rd of the time so twice in a 6 turn game. It will wound on 2+ against T4 on average and will reduce the save by 2 making that 3+ save a 5+ so statistically again you are likely killing 1 Marine a game with it. For carrying Jump INfantry? it can carry 6 Stormboyz, not exactly scary, and the only reason to do that is to give them that extra 3inches of movement on Turn 1 and 6 stormboyz aren't worth it since they have 3 attacks each at S4. Meganobz? Yeah they pretty much need a trukk as well and this edition they stink as well. 3 attacks each hitting on 4s? for that hefty price tag? no thanks.
What do I think it should be dropped to? maybe 15pts more then it was last edition. It really isn't worth 85pts (Big shoota/Wrecking Ball)
So did my points make sense? do I need to clarify anything else?
Martel732 wrote: I guess I'm just a terrible player then, because meched up Orks are terrifying for BA. I guess I don't own enough Stormravens. :(
Why martel? 10-12 boyz hopping out of a Trukk aren't exactly frightening. (12 boyz = 36 attacks, 24 hits and 12 wounds vs T4. Vs that 3+ save you end up with 4 casualties on average) Is that really scary? The Trick right now to Orkz winning is foot slogging hordes and some weirdboy spam everything else is just distractions.
It's not just the trukks. It's the battlewagons full of pain backed up by trukks. The battlewagons are pretty hard to stop for a "standard" BA list with lots of short ranged weapons. I know that's not how they're being used, though. It's painful to bring a bunch of lascannons over melta for me. The Stormraven spam thing has me really bummed out because it's so DUMB.
Martel732 wrote: It's not just the trukks. It's the battlewagons full of pain backed up by trukks. The battlewagons are pretty hard to stop for a "standard" BA list with lots of short ranged weapons. I know that's not how they're being used, though. It's painful to bring a bunch of lascannons over melta for me. The Stormraven spam thing has me really bummed out because it's so DUMB.
In a 2,000pt game you can bring a lot of boyz and Trukkz/battlewagons but not nearly as much as last edition. Trukkz/Battlewagons also LOST their #1 ability from last edition which was assaulting from the transport, now everyone has it, but they can't move first. Boyz also got slower.
So that 2,000 list. Trukkz (w/Wreckin Ball) filled with Boyz and a free nob with no upgrades cost (85+72) 157pts Last edition that same unit cost 117pts. Those boyz also got weaker on the charge then last edition. 11 boyz and 1 nob on the charge last edition had 44 S4 attacks and 5 S5 attacks, this edition they have 33 and 4.
The Battlewagon equipped with a deff rolla with 19 boyz and a free nob costs 300pts (Last edition that same mob cost 240pts) Those boyz have +1 attack per model right up until they lose 1 model....
So 1 trukk and 1 wagon costs 457pts so you can fit 4 wagons and 5 trukkz filled with boyz into a 2,000pt game Thats 4 Wagons, 5 Trukkz and 140boyz. Of course that isn't factoring in the required HQs and what not but just for a comparison. Going with just boyz, no vehicles you could field 11 Mobz of 30 Boyz each, or 330 Boyz and still have about 20pts left over.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I don't think I'd object to a free single attack made on a 6 if people disengaged. It would actually mean that things like power fists and thunderhammers would be unable to hit, unless you have a +1, but I'm okay with that.
I believe that the rule for overwatch states that a 6 is required to hit irrespective of any modifiers. So if this "melee overwatch" rule was written the same way the power fists would still hit.
