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.

Un-varied movement in 40k is just stupid. Yeah my marines is as fast as your terminator is as fast as your carnifex is as fast as your gaurdian, as your gaurdsmen, is as fast as your demonette, is as fast as your dreadnought.........

Its just silly. And am i to belive all races jump and jet-packs and wings and completely similar?

Is GW just to lazy to change something major and/or add another space on the stat bar?

I would love varied movement. It would make sense and add a different element to the game.

I think GW is trying to avoid making 40k more like Fantasy.

Really should be brought back. I think it was a good idea.

I'd like to direct your attention to Slow and Purposeful.

That is the closest 40k will get to it, and Im happy with it. Its nice to have universal movement rules.

Chaos Lord Gir wrote:I'd like to direct your attention to Slow and Purposeful.

That is the closest 40k will get to it, and Im happy with it. Its nice to have universal movement rules.

Exactly. GW is working towards a more streamlined game. Also, it makes sense. Because while the space marines may move faster than the terminator, they're also going to be more cautious because they're not as well protected.

I just started playing so I really haven't noticed. But the thing I have noticed is that it takes at least 2 turns for me to get my termgaunts or really anything else, such as genestealers to the front line. And for an army that is almost centered on close combat, this is difficult.

I still have yet t understand the rules of deep-striking, so for the moment I need another strategy.

Klawz wrote:

Chaos Lord Gir wrote:I'd like to direct your attention to Slow and Purposeful.

That is the closest 40k will get to it, and Im happy with it. Its nice to have universal movement rules.

Exactly. GW is working towards a more streamlined game. Also, it makes sense. Because while the space marines may move faster than the terminator, they're also going to be more cautious because they're not as well protected.

Oh no! better slow down in the open. I might run into their lasgun fire faster?

No need for caution when your charging the enemy in the open.

And why does a stubby little bastard like a dreadnought move the same speed as a wraithlord? A wraith-lord is just a giant humanoid with a very large range of movement. Dreadnoughts...not so much.

And why are bikes equal in technology? And all jet-bikes and speeders? and all wings and jump packs and do all beasts in 40000 years move at the same speed.

You're right, it doesn't make much sense really. Originally done to streamline the rules (although it is arguable whether it needed streamlining, the majority of stuff was 4" anyway, and Squats were 3".... erm.. exactly ) instead we now have USR which actually slow down the game more than if they had just keep the movement stat in, I would say.

Well, the orks get to go an extra inch if you have a certain colour....

I think that all thye major faction leaders in 40k met up once, and decided that, for fairnesses sake, they would all move the same speed. The Dark Eldar then broke the rules.

Luke_Prowler wrote:I think GW is trying to avoid making 40k more like Fantasy.

Which is a shame, since Fantasy actually has tactics.

Ogiwan wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:I think GW is trying to avoid making 40k more like Fantasy.

Which is a shame, since Fantasy actually has tactics.

+1

ChocolateGork wrote:Is GW just to lazy to change something major and/or add another space on the stat bar?

No, it's that GW USED to have everything be utterly different between everything else.

Things were so bloated, convoluted, and confusing, that it used to take you an entire afternoon and part of an evening to play a game of 40k.

The slow march of rules streamlining is a godsend. Gone are the days when you needed to keep cards or a notepad just to know what your troops were doing.

Whether or not you think 40k is becoming more boring, it is undoubtedly becoming, on the whole, a better game.

So adding varied movement would make 40k bloated, convoluted, and confusing?...

How would it make a game take longer?

You would be able to remove several USR that serve to make the game more bloated, convoluted, and confusing. With the addition of one simple stat.

It would make it convoluted because we'd have to cross-check every single unit profile to know how much it would move each turn, rather than point at it and say "oh, it's a bike, so it should move 12 inches". I dislike vehicles because they have mroe than 2 movement variables for the same reason, imagining all of them going at different rates would be a headache, especially on how to calculate cruising speed, combat speed and flat out.

Ogiwan wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:I think GW is trying to avoid making 40k more like Fantasy.

Which is a shame, since Fantasy actually has tactics.

Complexity =/= Depth. Play FATAL and you'll know what I mean.

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:It would make it convoluted because we'd have to cross-check every single unit profile to know how much it would move each turn, rather than point at it and say "oh, it's a bike, so it should move 12 inches". I dislike vehicles because they have mroe than 2 movement variables for the same reason, imagining all of them going at different rates would be a headache, especially on how to calculate cruising speed, combat speed and flat out.

It would be no more difficult than remembering the WS, BS, S, T, Armour save, LD or any other stat. Do you reference a book when ever you do something in the game involving one of the current stats?

One number wouldn't be very hard to remember

We actually do reference the books, which is very time consuming as is. At least the stats for those remain consistent between profiles. If I remember, even though horses shared the same general physical profile in Fantasy, they varied in their movements, as well as had movement modifiers on them. I still have to cross-check those, and I dont even play Fantasy.

ChocolateGork wrote:Oh no! better slow down in the open. I might run into their lasgun fire faster?

No need for caution when your charging the enemy in the open.

Well if you want to go faster you can always run. Otherwise, if you want to shoot something you would have to move at a relatively slow speed.

But not all the time. You just have to remember a few more numbers which will very likely have some pattern depending on race. For example the space marine codex would have no more than 5-6 different movement values if you don't include vehicles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Trickstick wrote:

ChocolateGork wrote:Oh no! better slow down in the open. I might run into their lasgun fire faster?

No need for caution when your charging the enemy in the open.

Well if you want to go faster you can always run. Otherwise, if you want to shoot something you would have to move at a relatively slow speed.

How much would a space marine have to slow down to shoot a bolter or a bolt pistol one handed? OR how about the difference between a scout with combat blades and a terminator with a cyclone missile launcher, thunder hammer and storm shield.

If you want the complex rules so badly, why not just "graduate" to Fantasy or something? We dont really need the whole game system to suffer the Space Marine syndrome.

Ogiwan wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:I think GW is trying to avoid making 40k more like Fantasy.

Which is a shame, since Fantasy actually has tactics.

I used to think like you do.

It took a while for me to actually realize how much of the game is determined by deployment. From that point on, tactics don't have as much of a roll at all.

Ailaros wrote:

ChocolateGork wrote:Is GW just to lazy to change something major and/or add another space on the stat bar?

No, it's that GW USED to have everything be utterly different between everything else.

Things were so bloated, convoluted, and confusing, that it used to take you an entire afternoon and part of an evening to play a game of 40k.

The slow march of rules streamlining is a godsend. Gone are the days when you needed to keep cards or a notepad just to know what your troops were doing.

Whether or not you think 40k is becoming more boring, it is undoubtedly becoming, on the whole, a better game.

This is a commonly held conception, and one that has been said so many times almost like some kind of mantra, but I don't believe it is correct.

I used to be able to remember stats for pretty much everything, no problem (like others have said, it's not like you are having to remember D&D character sheets). And when you are used to using those vehicle rules, you don't have to reference it every time you do so. I never ever had games which lasted an entire evening, unless we had deliberately gone overboard with the number of minis on the tabletop. Certainly, there is not the difference that people try and make out.

The only convoluted part of 2nd edition was the close combat (which again wasn't as bad as people make it out to be) and having to roll for grenades which had after effects.

Those clumsy elements could have been condensed, but GW went the whole hog and tore a huge chunk out of the game, with an aim to try and push model numbers on the tabletop to ridiculous levels and therefore flog more stuff. The cost for the player is a game which is virtually bereft of any depth at all. So now, unit-only rules are having to be shoehorned back into the system to create alternative probabilities during the game, making it appear top heavy and poorly designed.

A lot of people really miss spun out troopers shooting their own squad mates, of throwing grenades through windows, of psychic duelling, or tank turrets blowing off and crushing your own troops. For many people these were the bits which made the game cinematic and noteworthy, not having to use one of those giant rake things (from the Battle of Britain movie), or a shovel to move your hordes of troops around the board. I admit that having two massive armies facing off against each other is an impressive sight (for the 5% of times when both armies are fully painted, on decent terrain), but that is the style of game that GW is pushing for and it's hard to reconcile that to the bits (I would say 'character') which has been lost in the process.

But, horses for courses I guess, I'm sure that many people would disagree with me!

Pacific wrote:
A lot of people really miss spun out troopers shooting their own squad mates, of throwing grenades through windows, of psychic duelling, or tank turrets blowing off and crushing your own troops.

Those people can play that game if they like. It's not as if those rules are unfindable.

It's also no coincidence that most people aren't using those rules.

This version IS better. That's why people play it and not the previous versions. Tabletop gamers are not fickle; they're deeply entrenched in their ways and only switch to things that actually bludgeon them with how much better it is.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Pacific wrote:
A lot of people really miss spun out troopers shooting their own squad mates, of throwing grenades through windows, of psychic duelling, or tank turrets blowing off and crushing your own troops.

Those people can play that game if they like. It's not as if those rules are unfindable.

It's also no coincidence that most people aren't using those rules.

This version IS better. That's why people play it and not the previous versions. Tabletop gamers are not fickle; they're deeply entrenched in their ways and only switch to things that actually bludgeon them with how much better it is.

Which is why everyone switched to fourth edition Dungeons and Dragons, right? While most (from what I hear) did, I don't think that's why.

I think the OP makes a valid point, as does Pacific. Several people play Warhammer in tournaments. You can only do this in the current edition, generally. Several people expect the game company to continue to support and improve their product - they will, but only in the new edition. They don't write codicies for 4th edition anymore. For D&D, several people (including my old group) played in the RPGA, supported by Wizards of the Coast, and so had to switch to 4th. Most of the people I knew complained.

One more line with an "M" and a number under it for every unit is not going to mess things up. You could even make the rulebook make more sense with it. Vehicles use the exact same method - a single "M". This represents their maximum combat speed. Doubled is their maximum Cruising speed, and tripled is their maximum flat-out speed (if fast). You could condense hard to find rules on fast vehicles and how the shoot at certain speeds (we had trouble with it for ages), into a simple USR for vehicles - "Fast".

OP, I think this is a solid point. I think you could include such things in a non-complicated manner.

But then it's GW. They have to make the game "simple" just to make their rules "complicated" as opposed to "impossible".

EDIT: For clarity's sake.

I think that adding in a movement stat would simply be a different way of representing the Unit Types. However, I think that replacing the current movement rules and unit types with a movement stat and different rules could create a more flexible and more streamlined system, and also save the new players from having to remember so much.

For example:
Movement Stat is in 2 parts: Move and Assault phase. Most units will be 6/6. Jump Inf/Bikes will be 12/6, Cavalry become 6/12. Most Vehicles become 12/0.

Then have rules for cover: Move Through Cover, Treat Difficult as Dangerous, Ignore Terrain/Hover, Fleet. Slow+Purposeful. Jets.
Relentless becomes the same as Fast - can move 6" with no penalties on firing.

I think a system like that, with rules such as Hover which can be applied to Skimmers, Jetbikes and Jump Infantry alike, wiould be more streamlined, easier to learn, whilst providing better flexibility within core game rules to add in new unit types not thought of before.

I like the rules like how they now are. I find it isn't a problem with the same movement. If you want to it be complicated it's not my problem and could change all of the stats 'cause each guardsmen in a squad hasn't the same strenght for example.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Pacific wrote:
A lot of people really miss spun out troopers shooting their own squad mates, of throwing grenades through windows, of psychic duelling, or tank turrets blowing off and crushing your own troops.

Those people can play that game if they like. It's not as if those rules are unfindable.

It's also no coincidence that most people aren't using those rules.

This version IS better. That's why people play it and not the previous versions. Tabletop gamers are not fickle; they're deeply entrenched in their ways and only switch to things that actually bludgeon them with how much better it is.

Are you being serious? The only way the older systems survive is amongst close-knit gaming groups.

Sadly, 95% of gamers either rely on a club or their local store, and there uniformity is key. You have to go with whatever the latest offering of the rules is, no matter how unpopular they might be. Gamers have to be fickle, the more choosy they are (especially when you are talking about games played as widely as GW's) then the less likely they will be able to have a game, or seen as some kind of pariah because you aren't 'towing the party line'.

As TheRedArmy said, 4th edition D&D was widely disliked, and for the most part 8th edition WFB has been greeted with about the same enthusiasm as the latest series of Big Brother, most people having recognised the 'update' for what it is; a cynical attempt to get everyone to buy the rule books once more, and then spend horrendous amounts of money on overpriced core units. A lot of people stopped playing 40k on the release of 3rd edition, after essentially a chunk of the game got torn out (then bodged back in with WD and IA articles after they realised how unpopular it was). But the point being most of us don't have a choice, unless you are fortunate enough to have an intimate group of gaming buddies. If you want to have a regular opponent, you have to give it stiff-upper-lip treatment and just carry on.

And then come onto forums and winge about 'oh what might have been' ?

Brennian wrote:I like the rules like how they now are. I find it isn't a problem with the same movement. If you want to it be complicated it's not my problem and could change all of the stats 'cause each guardsmen in a squad hasn't the same strenght for example.

The thing is, there is so many different movement rules designed to show how fast units are, that a movement stat would be decreasing complication overall. It would likely be a single value for an entire army, or the removal of a number of special rules - being able to streamline the vehicle type rules under the normal unit type rules would cut down on a lot of the complication.

There are things that make things faster than others.

Fleet
Move Through Cover
Infiltrate
Scout
Hit & Run
Turbo-Boost

Outflanking in general.

Beats and Cavalry assault 12'.

Is there really no varied movement in 40k?

ZacktheChaosChild wrote:There are things that make things faster than others.

Fleet
Move Through Cover
Infiltrate
Scout
Hit & Run
Turbo-Boost

Outflanking in general.

Beats and Cavalry assault 12'.

Is there really no varied movement in 40k?

I believe what he means is base movement. The agile, sleek Eldar and DE jog no faster than Guardsmen or even heavily-armored terminators. Yeah, they have fleet, but that's not useful unless I intend to assault. As for MTC, it only gives you another die when rolling how far you move, and thus the variance is random, but the potential minimum and maximum is the save for everyone. Infiltrate, in and of itself, has nothing to do with movement, though the rest do.

However, fluff-wise, it is hard to argue with the OP's point. Gamewise, though, it is harder to modify from current perspective while retaining balance. Assault units and skirmishers (of a sort) could be slightly faster than others of their race, while units like Heavy Weapons Teams, Devastators, and Obliterators (who already have S&P to represent this) move slower since they handle the big stuff.

Transports has faster speeds than LRBTs, or maybe it's based off of the unit's armor.

I think with quite of a bit of work, you can make it work. It'll be tough to maintain balance, though.