Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

According to this article on the front page of BoLS, 8th Edition WHFB allows players to measure any distance at any time. (Although in a bizarre turn of events, charge ranges are randomly rolled for?). But the article discusses several pros of allowing measuring at all times, namely that it eliminates the skill gap between people who are good at eye-balling and those who are not. The author argues that this create a more even playing field which is good for fun and fairness. I tend to agree.

So, if that is the direction that GW seems to be going, what do folks think about applying pre-measuring to 40k?

I think it's a nice crutch for bad players. I won't be doing it, even if it is legal.

Meh, I don't know. Really, there aren't THAT many instances in a game of 40K where the last inch matters that much. If you're well practiced in your army, you know your movement, shooting, and charge ranges pretty damn close and it usually doesn't matter a whole lot, or is variable like moving through terrain. I doubt it will have much effect on the game. Frankly, I hope they allow a single unit to split its fire and charge whatever they want long before I care about adding premeasurement.

Silly, if your going to do that, you might as well take "G 6-18" weapons out, or just completely get rid of guess weapons...

Thay did get rid of guess range weapons.

I support this fully for exactly the stated reason - some people are just plain better at estimating range than others - a few people will never be able to do it accurately no matter how much they practice. C'est la Vie. I don't see why they should be excluded from the game.

I also don't see why someone granted superior spacial reasoning by a fluke of nature should have a concrete advantage in the game.

It's not a crutch for bad players - it's the elimination of a barrier that has no reason to exist.

A wargame ought to be a test of a player's tactical skill, puzzle-solving, understanding of probability, cunning - hell, even a test of his understanding of psychology and game theory. It oughtn't be a test of spacial reasoning.

Side note, it may make games take alot longer, which is dreadful since alot of games don't get finished in tournaments anyway.

I played a few game were you could pre-mesure and I lked it. Once we got used to it it made the game move quicker.

To play devil's advocate, it does reduce some of the uncertainty and risk involved in maneuvers. Are you within charge range next turn or not? With pre-measuring that is easy to know.

That said, I'm not very good at measuring distances while my roommate (a horde player who lives and dies by the charge) has exceptional eye-balling skills. It would be nice to even the playing field a bit.

Though I do wonder if 40k 6th edition will bring in the random charge distance that WFB is adding? Apparently units charge their movement plus 2D6 or 3D6 if they are cavalry.

Will be easier to keep those players with "generous" movements in check, too. Measuring to make sure you are outside of charge range while declaring "I'll just place these guys right outside your charge range..." and the like will prevent shenanigans.

Slarg232 wrote:Silly, if your going to do that, you might as well take "G 6-18" weapons out, or just completely get rid of guess weapons...

Yeeaaaah.... Definitely some silly things going on there.

I don't like the idea myself. Very few things come down to the last inch, but knowing you're in/out of Assault range changes tactics a great bit. Think of casualty removal or Fleet units deciding to run/shoot. It takes something away from the game to me.

I'm wholly against this. I'm a "bad" WHFB player (albeit because I've got about 3 games under my belt) but I feel that being able to tell distance is crucial and a good part of the learning curve. It's not just eyeballing. My "mentor" so to say is a man named Boldo who has won a few GT's and taught me that it's never truely guess range after the first shot, let me explain.

He guesses 37" with his cannon, he's 3 inches too far.
My turn the unit wheels and marches for a total of 8"
He now takes his 37 guess, subtracts 3 that's 34 and takes into account that I wheeled 3 inches and marched 5 so he should reduce the distance by a further 3" now 31 and fires for a direct hit.

In this way it's not really guess.

Alternatively since that cannon shot was 37" and his empire spearmen were 24" from the cannon (which he mentally noted during the measuring of his shot last turn) and my troops moved aprox 3 more inches closer his charge range is:

37-3 (overshoot)
34-3 (troop movement)
31-24 (distance from his spearmen to his cannon)
7" - The aproximate distance between his spearmen & my troops which tells him that either he can charge me, or he needs to move back a bit or I may charge him.

As for 40k my stance doesn't change, just Fire your longest range guns first & you should have a relative understanding of distances on the board (though some find this unsportsman like)

Azezel wrote:I also don't see why someone granted superior spacial reasoning by a fluke of nature should have a concrete advantage in the game.

You could make the same argument though for tactical decision making, or mathematical ability, or any number of other things that go into making someone a better player than someone else.


I would argue that being able to accurately estimate distances between units is a very large part of the tactics in a wargame. Not being able to do that as well as someone else doesn't exclude you from the game... it just means you're not as good at that particular aspect of the game.

Having said that, I've played other games that do allow for measurements at any time, and it doesn't remove the tactical element... just focusses it slightly differently and removes that element of uncertainty.

Why not just play on a grid? You won't need to measure anything.

*Groan* THIS IS NOT DnD!!!!!!

I've always been against pre-measuring, but after reading the article I have changed my opinion and now think it's a good thing. I'm willing to bet this will come to 40K 6th edition and make things better.

Zip Napalm wrote:Why not just play on a grid? You won't need to measure anything.

Exactly.

Wargames are played on a scale board with terrain to emulate reality, and model something in the unknown.

Pre measuring takes away a large amount of the appeal for playing on a table instead of a map/board in the first place.

Having to do math on the fly
Having to remember how far things go
Having to calculate risk
Order of operations
Occasionally missing because of the unknown
Imperfect situations
Bluffing

These are all important game elements that pre measuring destroys.

IMO most gamers like pre measuring because they simply can not handle the unknown, are to incapable to keep track of ranges or do the math, and won't commit to making a risk analysis call during a game.

Sad

Pre measuring is complete failure. If that rule is really in the new Warhammer book, then I'd say they let the insecure player/designers go to far.

Did I mention I hate pre measuring?

Let's allow people that are bad at eyeballing distance premeasure as it is an unfair advantage.

Can we also just only be allowed to use pre-made Army list? After all some people are better at list building than others and that is an unfair advantage.

Indeed, lets let all people with an IQ under 80 have 125% of the normal points limit too...

I've got mixed feelings about this. I pretty bad at eye balling but at the same time I know that its always an advantage if the opponent doesnt know the exact range of anything I dunno about this.

I personally have eyesight issues which comprimises my depth perception to some degree. This can make judging distances a bit of a pain, but I have learned to accept this and play around it.

The problem is that premeasuring removes the risk factor. I think allowing premeasuring is only really a good idea in a system of non-fixed movement. An example might be that infantry can move D6 inches plus/minus some profile number. Make running and assaulting the same, and presto you still have risk involved in your maneuvering without the need for judging distances.

Well a lot of the pre-measuring will be offset by the random charge distance as well.

I'm absolutely terrible at guessing distances. I think this is a positive change

There's no reason that the ability to know the difference between 46" and 49" should impact a game. I don't have shoot rubber bands to knock my opponent's men over, why should I have to use a personal skill that has nothing to do with the abilities of the models on the table to accomplish anything.

Pre-measuring doesn't change the dynamics of the game from an open-movement tabletop to a grid.



1) Having to do math on the fly? Of course you still have to do math on the fly. You need to do your probability calculations.

2) Having to remember how far things go? Excuse me? You can always look that up. Pre-measuring has no impact at all here.

3) Having to calculate risk? You still have to calculate risk. What you don't have to do is lose a shooting phase because your rapid fire guns would prevent you from charging when you're 6.1 inches from an opponent. I'd rather play a game where I win because I made the right decision, not because my opponent misjudged a distance by 1%.

4) Order of operations? Still important. Knowing a distance doesn't change that distance. I still have to decide which unit to shoot first and risk my opponent pulling casualties that would put another unit out of range.

5) Occasionally missing because of the unknown? This is the first one that is actually an effect of pre-measuring. And, honestly, I can't say I'm sad to see it go. I'd rather play a game where the results come down to decisions that my opponent and I make, rather than having a couple of millimeters mean the difference between a tight game and a blow-out.

Did you know that a quarter inch is less than 1% of the range of a heavy bolter? This isn't a level of precision that I want deciding games.

6) Imperfect situations? Situations will still be imperfect. Angles will still exist. Your assault troops will still be left in the open sometimes. You're still going to fail difficult terrain tests.

7) Bluffing? How exactly does pre-measuring affect the ability to bluff, at all?

Augustus, you're ascribing way too much to this.

I like that it would reduce the amount of movement-fudging that goes on at the local GW.

I don't like that it would take an element of skill away from the game.

Tough call.

I used to think premeasuring would eliminate a lot of the skill involved in tabletop gaming, but then I played Hordes of the Things and premeasuring was allowed at all times. Instead of simplfying the tabletop manuevers it increased them the tactical aspect of them. Arguments also dropped as I would premeasure a charge distance at the end of my current turn to ensure that we both knew I was in charge range. I think it can be a positive move to enhance the tabletop play.

Azezel wrote:Thay did get rid of guess range weapons.

I support this fully for exactly the stated reason - some people are just plain better at estimating range than others - a few people will never be able to do it accurately no matter how much they practice. C'est la Vie. I don't see why they should be excluded from the game.

I also don't see why someone granted superior spacial reasoning by a fluke of nature should have a concrete advantage in the game.

It's not a crutch for bad players - it's the elimination of a barrier that has no reason to exist.

A wargame ought to be a test of a player's tactical skill, puzzle-solving, understanding of probability, cunning - hell, even a test of his understanding of psychology and game theory. It oughtn't be a test of spacial reasoning.

Having the ability to eyeball something does not happen by fluke, it happens with practice, I used to suck at eyeballing measurements and say nut or socket sizes but practice (work) has made me better. I think no premeasuring is an integral part of the game, changing it would change so much.

Slarg232 wrote:Silly, if your going to do that, you might as well take "G 6-18" weapons out, or just completely get rid of guess weapons...

Sorry for the minor derail...What's a guess weapon? I thought these now use the barrage rules...

The main reason I'd support this is because it helps keep a reign on cheaters.

Me and my group of friends always premeasure, it speeds things up.

I'd welcome the change. I think that list building and tactical decision making are far more interesting skill sets to focus on than being able to eyeball a distance.

Well a lot of the pre-measuring will be offset by the random charge distance as well.

I think this is a much more interesting way of adding an element of uncertainty. It's based on a known element of the game state. You can take calculated risks since you know for sure what the variance is and how likely each outcome is. You don't get that with eyeballing.

VoxDei wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:Silly, if your going to do that, you might as well take "G 6-18" weapons out, or just completely get rid of guess weapons...

Sorry for the minor derail...What's a guess weapon? I thought these now use the barrage rules...

Guess Weapons are weapons you have to guess the range of before you shoot. A G 6-18 has a minimum range of 6" with a max of 18" and you have to guess in that range.

And if they already have gotten rid of G-Weapons, I appologize, as I still do not have the 5th edition.