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.

So I heard a proposal on BoLS today that sounds simple to implement, simple to remember, and very obvious improvement on the imbalance that exists between shooting and assault.

Fantasy has a rule called Stand and Shoot. I do not play Fantasy so I do not know what the rule says verbatim but it works somewhere along the lines of 'when a defending unit is charged by an assaulting unit, the defending unit may fire at the assaulting unit as if it were the shooting phase.'

If you know the exact rule please enlighten us.

I think this rule makes sense for one and would really help improve the game. What do you think?

I have played long long ago WHFB rules and "stand-and-fire" just lets you take one final shot when an enemy comes in contact with you, before the melee phase begins. Pretty simple, really. I doubt if it has changed much if it's still there, but I haven't seen newer WHFB rules.

I think it would be a great improvement in 40k, as since overwatch disappeared long ago, it is possible to close in with never a shot fired, by dodging between terrain LOS blocks, and charge a shooty army before a shot is ever fired. At least give the shooty army one volley of fire, since the oncoming ork horde isn't actually teleporting between building getting to them, but rushing at them from behind a building. It's just dumb that nobody would have their gun loaded and readied to get a shot off before they get stuck in the fray.

Well, the rule is rather simple, in fantasy.
When charged, the unit can choose to fire at the attackers as long as the charge started outside a certain area.
The shots are fired as normal but with a -1 to hit modifier, the unit fight as normal later on.

However, I don't think this will improve the game at all, simply becuase shooting is good enough already, taking an additional rapid fire in the face is rather...stupid.

I could see it as a special rule for some units though. But with a pretty hefty price and/or some other penalty (fight at -1 to hit and can't use 2 CWW maybe. Or that they didn't fire the turn before)

@ Oscarius: I completely disagree with you that shooting is good enough already. Until that gap is bridged there will not be any agreement as to whether or not 40K should include Stand and Shoot in the next edition.

would you grab a sword and charge at someone with a machinegun 30 feet away? yeah it is, in your words, rather... stupid.

However, in 40k this seems perfectly reasonable because assault so vastly outweighs shooting when it comes to effective trouncing of a target unit.

We just have to agree to disagree, I think shooting is good enough now, you often need some kind of CC-element, but that is only good.

The reason I wouldn't like this is 40k is that it would make smaller, or maimed, units redundant, they can't charge without getting killed. Also, 40k shooting weapons is much, much more powerful than their fantasy variants, and is much cheaper too. Also, in fantasy, the more powerful things (like cannons and stone throwers) are unable to stand and shoot, meaning that it's mostly small arms that can fire.

Oscarius wrote:We just have to agree to disagree, I think shooting is good enough now, you often need some kind of CC-element, but that is only good.

The reason I wouldn't like this is 40k is that it would make smaller, or maimed, units redundant, they can't charge without getting killed. Also, 40k shooting weapons is much, much more powerful than their fantasy variants, and is much cheaper too. Also, in fantasy, the more powerful things (like cannons and stone throwers) are unable to stand and shoot, meaning that it's mostly small arms that can fire.

Well that makes sense. How about Heavy weapons can't "S&S" unless the defending unit is Relentless or otherwise capable of moving and firing Heavy weapons.

If you want to play-test it I'd say start with only allowing it with rapidfire weapons (and resolve it before the enemy makes his assault move perhaps). That keeps it on mostly basic arms and no melta gun fire and the like.

Jack

I think thye should add it as an option to Rapid-fire weapons.

you get to shoot at -1 BS(to a minimum of 1) when being charged.

I should add this. I'm not at all against the idea of different reactions. But I think they need some kind of overhaul. Just simply adding it would make some things very strong, grey hunters for example (so bad that I think no one would charge them, and just let them charge you)

Like I said, with some restrictions, like no heavy weapons, coupled with penatlies, or a re-hash of the old overwatch rule it could work.

Something like: Any unit can choose to do nothing at all during their turn, if they are charged they may instanly fire their weapons at the attacker. They fire after the attacker have declared the charge but before they move. Heavy weapons suffer a -1 to hit pentaly and template and blast weapons can't be used.

Something like this might work.

bring back overwatch and you solve the issue. All it meant was "i forego shooting in my phase so I can declare it during your movement at the first thing I see". Evidently the designers decided that the new kids brought in the hobby were too dense to gronk such a concept, so they dumber it down. Overwatch used to be a big big deal, especially for static heavy weapons shooty squads. It did get complicated because you could bait the overwatchers into firing with a unit they wouldnt really want to shoot at (heavy bolters at a LR for instance, or a lascannon at Gaunts) but it did make for a much more well thought out game than "shovel everything into assault and roll dice for the win" assault heavy game we play nowadays.

Jackmojo wrote:If you want to play-test it I'd say start with only allowing it with rapidfire weapons (and resolve it before the enemy makes his assault move perhaps). That keeps it on mostly basic arms and no plasma gun fire and the like.

Jack

As much as I agree for practicality sake, i cannot seem to get the vision of governor Ventura firing away at the encroaching predator with the "assault cannon" out of my head.

Its true this type of ability would really hurt multiple small assault units (eldar, BA) but I think it would really help against hordes, demons, and raider/rhino rush. Gone is the times where a shooty force could get three rounds of firing off against an assaulty force. Deep strike, out flank, and fast vehicles among others things have all done away with that making assault forces tremendously dangerous.

Defending unit has the option of responding with fire instead of CC -

1. No matter ROF, it means 1 shot per weapon so A3 weapon gets 1 shot. An H1 ML get one shot.
2. Aiming as opposed to ducking - +1 to hit for attacker because you are aiming a weapon rather than responding to his HTH attacks.
3. Pistols mean opponent does not get +1 to hit you and you do not lose your CC attack(s). Also means you get rid of a pistol counting as an extra CCW rule.

So 10 dire avengers get 10 S4 shots at you but your attacks are going to hit on a 3+ since he is shooting rather than direct HTH response.

DAaddict wrote:Defending unit has the option of responding with fire instead of CC -

1. No matter ROF, it means 1 shot per weapon so A3 weapon gets 1 shot. An H1 ML get one shot.
2. Aiming as opposed to ducking - +1 to hit for attacker because you are aiming a weapon rather than responding to his HTH attacks.
3. Pistols mean opponent does not get +1 to hit you and you do not lose your CC attack(s). Also means you get rid of a pistol counting as an extra CCW rule.

So 10 dire avengers get 10 S4 shots at you but your attacks are going to hit on a 3+ since he is shooting rather than direct HTH response.

How about:
1) full number of shots with no modifiers,
2) no Heavy unless could otherwise move and fire,
3) Unit choosing to S&S strikes last unless unit fired only Pistols

This will just make the metagame even more mech than it is now, especially for Orks. "Go ahead with your stand and shoot charge reaction, your shots will just bounce off of my battlewagon anyway."

warpcrafter wrote:This will just make the metagame even more mech than it is now, especially for Orks. "Go ahead with your stand and shoot charge reaction, your shots will just bounce off of my battlewagon anyway."

Then there is only a plus side. Assault armies will be required to spend more points on transports and the meta game has moved in that direction anyway so there is little downside.

tyranids are still in the game and they cant take trasports
and with this pretty much unplayable

this rule makes units with template weapons near un assautable
try charge a unit of 15 burnas with nids
good luck

stand and shoot works for some games and not with others
40k is the last

I'm sorry but I have to agree with Oscarius while it may make sense that desperate guardsmen who have little to no CC skill could S+S it would not be fair to anybody if terminators got to launch the flamer part of their combi flamers at the charging ork nobz simply because terminators can already hold their own in CC without the need to take a S+S. Furthermore consider this Tau ain't that great at CC but they are (IMHO) the best at shooting so if ork boyz make it to the fire warriors lines then that is because of the tau players' own tactics are failing. Also if a S+S rule was applied the younger gamers would just get to use that rule instead of tactics and just say 'well sure your tyranids are really good in combat and I bet you have a super-cool tactic for them but I will still win because my plan is just to wait until you charge me the i will fire my pulse rifles at you and you will die because you won't make it to CC HA HA'

warpcrafter wrote:This will just make the metagame even more mech than it is now, especially for Orks. "Go ahead with your stand and shoot charge reaction, your shots will just bounce off of my battlewagon anyway."

My suggestion is that you have a choice of 1 shot (goes first) in response to a declared assault - So unless you can charge a battlewagon into HTH, it does you no good. But you put it all together and your choice is 1 shot with your bolters to the charging orcs but then the orcs are going to hit on a 3+. If you have super weapons, that 1 shot might be worth it but the primary response to CC should be you defending yourself not coolly aiming at him.

The other statement made was full ROF. Sorry, no, then you might as well never play orcs. 30 orcs get shot by 10 devastators with 4 hvy bolters and 6 bolters at 12" That should kill result in 8 S4 and 8 S5 hits. So about 10 orcs dead. Now the 20 orks move forward and charge the marines and they get full ROF .... 10 more orks dead before the orks get their attacks. Sorry no. OTOH 1 Shot means 6 S4 shots and 4 S5 shots instead of 11 or 12 S4 HTH attacks from the marines. Arguably about equal. Instead of devastators make it a guard unit with a plasma and a hvy bolter. 1 S7, 1 S10 and 8 S3 shots instead of 10 or 11 S3 attacks.

Shooting in response to an assault should not be a second full fire phase rather a reactive shot while at some point you are aiming and the enemy is bearing down on you with a whirling chainsword. Not a full fire phase and -1 BS sounds good to a marine but an Ork or Tau will cringe counting on 5s or 6s to get a result.

I think that Foll RoF with Rapid Fire weapons only would work fine and make them I1 in an assault.


most things with Rapid fire weapons arn't geared for CC so being I1 isn't a huge deal.


it certaintly make T'au better as FWs would have more bite.

Initiative 1? Why? They'd be shooting before the enemy came into contact, if you're doing it that way, double the initiative of the normal unit.

Personally I think the game is fine as is, because this game isn't supposed to make sense, and people seem to fail to realize that.

@ all those who keep thinking up situations where this would be bad: why are you doing that?! If the rules change then so do your tactics and target priority. Besides, since the rule does not actually exist shouldn't you be suggesting the limitations on the broader concept? For instance someone mentioned that orks charging HB slinging devs would hurt. A) no crap. why would you do that? B) it has been said multiple time that this prolly shouldn't apply to heavies unless you are relentless.

@ Grayspark: the game IS supposed to make sense. That is why with every new edition the writers attempt to emulate real life in their rules. TLOS is a perfect example. I am also fairly certain Tank Shock has only been around for about two editions now.

This game is supposed to make sense?! You've been eating too many Khorne flakes or something. I didn't think high powered rifles from the future could only shoot 24x the height of a man and actually make sense. I'm not sure gun barrels the size of your head make much sense either. Grenades from a launcher can kill someone, but when hand thrown they just say 'duck and cover' in real life too, right? Maybe its just me.

This game is a intrepertation of real life physics(those that do exist)

it is a Sci-fiction story so is based on solid facts with additional stuff tacked on and some base assumptions.


FWIW there are guns with barrels the size of your head.


the game also compromises to allow the game to be practical. Bolters would have an effective killing range of a couple miles, but that would be impractical in game terms so we compromise and make them shorter.

Yeah there are barrels the size of my head, but they are mounted on tanks, not an Imperial Guard Officer firing one-handed.

Point is, there is nothing attempting realism in this game, it is a fantasy game, and as such, it doesn't have to make sense as it invents its own reality.

heavy bolters only fire fist sized shells and the standard bolters are smaller than that and guard bolters are even smaller. What weapon are you referring to with the commissar or is he lugging around an autocannon?

my fist is larger than anything short of a tank shell. calibre-wise even the old LAV75 with the anti-tank gun are still not bigger than my fist. Point being, it isn't meant to be realistic and the only people who attemped to apply real-world logic to this game probably have PTSD or severe Aspergers or some other wierd way of trying to rationalize an irrational fictional idea into a sense of understanding the precise 'rules'.

Deuce11 wrote:So I heard a proposal on BoLS today that sounds simple to implement, simple to remember, and very obvious improvement on the imbalance that exists between shooting and assault.

People always talk about this imbalance between shooting and assault. It can mean loads of different things, and I don't think any of them are particularly strong arguments. Do you mean that assault armies are the best... that's not the case and if it was, it'd be a balancing issue between codices not an issue with the core rules. Do you mean that in your experience quality shooting units are not as powerful as quality assault units, or not more powerful by as much as you think they should be or something? If so, you have to remember the 40K universe is heroic fantasy, it's deliberately unrealistic in order to be more awesome, and that means downplaying the real life dominance of firearms in order to have people hacking at each other with chainswords.

Fantasy has a rule called Stand and Shoot. I do not play Fantasy so I do not know what the rule says verbatim but it works somewhere along the lines of 'when a defending unit is charged by an assaulting unit, the defending unit may fire at the assaulting unit as if it were the shooting phase.'

If you know the exact rule please enlighten us.

When the charge is declared you can choose one of a few charge reactions, you can flee, you can just stand there, or you can fire at the enemy as he charges. If you choose the latter, then if the target is more than a minimum distance away (too close and you wouldn't have time to fire) then you can fire one last time, suffering a -1 modifier because your shot is rushed and under pressure.

I think this rule makes sense for one and would really help improve the game. What do you think?

I think the stand and fire rule works very well in a game where rank and file infantry blocks line up across a field from each other. A charge in that setting involves marching in close formation until you're forty or fifty metres from the enemy, properly forming the line then making the charge. There's loads of time for an enemy armed with ranged weapons to fire into your ranks as you advance.

Assaults in 40K are nothing like that. Firing in 40K is nothing like the long thin lines of troops of WHFB. In 40K an assault would involve firing teams leapfrogging each other laying down suppressing fire as they advance, throwing grenades to further suppress the enemy. Nor does assault in 40K strictly mean getting close enough to stab the other guy, it can mean extremely close range firefights.

The big thing to remember is that while the board makes it look one group of guys is standing completely still while another groups of guys runs straight into them, you're really looking at a highly fluid battlefield where everyone is supposed to moving all the time, and where the game turn isn't a distinct event, but where the turn is an abstraction of multiple events bleeding into each other. You say that unit should get to do something in response to the guys running in to assault them, well they were standing and firing, this is represented by them doubletapping their rapid fire weapons in the last turn.

How about simply letting the unit getting charged get to either...
a) Fight as normal in combat
or
b) In the first round of any combat where you are getting charged, the unit may forgo their normal attacks in order to fire at the opponent. If you do this resolve your shots first, after the enemy has charged but before they roll their dice...
Template weapons hit D6 enemies.
Blast weapons use BS to hit and have D3(d6 for large) shots.
Any shots are resolved at -1 to hit.
Defensive grenades may not be used.
Casualties caused count for combat resolution.

This would give units like guardians, fire warriors and IG some punch in combat (for 1 round) when they get charged... i'll admit it may be OP on some units such as burnas.

Deuce11 wrote:@ all those who keep thinking up situations where this would be bad: why are you doing that?! If the rules change then so do your tactics and target priority. Besides, since the rule does not actually exist shouldn't you be suggesting the limitations on the broader concept? For instance someone mentioned that orks charging HB slinging devs would hurt. A) no crap. why would you do that? B) it has been said multiple time that this prolly shouldn't apply to heavies unless you are relentless.
.

tell me what tactics tyranids could use versus gunline IG with nearly every unit packing flamer
outflank with stealers? nope, they get killed by templates thanks to stand and shoot
hormagaunts? see stealers
try outshoot the guard?

your relentless only rule ,only makes sense if that unit has moved