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.

 Jidmah wrote:
I recently played a game where a unit could skip their shooting to either open fire on a unit that got close or return fire when shot at (you had to chose which one).

I really felt like this would be a good addition to 40k as well.

Mhm, a defensive fire option would be nice. Frankly, this is what I always thought overwatch should have been instead, rather than an additional shooting sequence.

That's what Overwatch was in 2nd iirc.

Yes originally overwatch was what you put a unit into instead of shooting. And it let you shoot at the first unit that walked into range of their guns.

Was a great option back then and would be now as well (since terrain should be blocking los alot).

If they changed overwatch back to that, you could bring back "Hail of Fire" abilities on certain weapons that let them do the current overwatch (flamers would still be able to do the current overwatch).

Good strategy games are all about giving players tough and interesting choices, with consequences, trade-offs, and risks.

In ProHammer, we're trying to inject exactly this into the system.

Yes originally overwatch was what you put a unit into instead of shooting. And it let you shoot at the first unit that walked into range of their guns.

Was a great option back then and would be now as well (since terrain should be blocking los alot).

If they changed overwatch back to that, you could bring back "Hail of Fire" abilities on certain weapons that let them do the current overwatch (flamers would still be able to do the current overwatch).

What we have in ProHammer is two fold, there is overwatch similar to 2nd edition, as well as reaction fire. Here's how it works collectively.

* If you don't move or shoot with a unit on your turn, you can put it into overwatch.
* The shooting phase is divided into two steps, a "first fire" phase and a "normal" shooting phase.
* During the first fire phase, units that that didn't move this turn can shoot simultaneously with opposing units on overwatch. Meaning both sides get to resolve all of their attacks and then casualties/damage get applied at the end first fire sub-phase.
* During normal shooting phase, it works as normal, with the active player shooting with any of their units that moved.
* When a unit is hit by normal fire they may perform "reactive fire" and shoot back. Reactive fire has a few penalties (can't shoot the full amount of shots and limited to 24" range) and it also means that unit can't shoot normally on its own next turn.
* Normal shooting and reactive shooting are resolved and casualties/damage applied immediately.
* Reactive fire can also be taken against units that declare a charge against them, but they fight weaker in the fight phase.
* In all cases, a unit can only shoot once per turn.

The above, taken collectively, preserves the IGOUGO structure of the game but weaves in options and choices for reactions and interrupting. It simulates simultaneous fire and alternating activations where it matters (in resolving shooting attacks) and makes shooting more comparable to assaulting in that regard (with both sides getting opportunities to fight). It has worked well in our games so far.

 Mezmorki wrote:
Good strategy games are all about giving players tough and interesting choices, with consequences, trade-offs, and risks.

In ProHammer, we're trying to inject exactly this into the system.

Yes originally overwatch was what you put a unit into instead of shooting. And it let you shoot at the first unit that walked into range of their guns.

Was a great option back then and would be now as well (since terrain should be blocking los alot).

If they changed overwatch back to that, you could bring back "Hail of Fire" abilities on certain weapons that let them do the current overwatch (flamers would still be able to do the current overwatch).

What we have in ProHammer is two fold, there is overwatch similar to 2nd edition, as well as reaction fire. Here's how it works collectively.

* If you don't move or shoot with a unit on your turn, you can put it into overwatch.
* The shooting phase is divided into two steps, a "first fire" phase and a "normal" shooting phase.
* During the first fire phase, units that that didn't move this turn can shoot simultaneously with opposing units on overwatch. Meaning both sides get to resolve all of their attacks and then casualties/damage get applied at the end first fire sub-phase.
* During normal shooting phase, it works as normal, with the active player shooting with any of their units that moved.
* When a unit is hit by normal fire they may perform "reactive fire" and shoot back. Reactive fire has a few penalties (can't shoot the full amount of shots and limited to 24" range) and it also means that unit can't shoot normally on its own next turn.
* Normal shooting and reactive shooting are resolved and casualties/damage applied immediately.
* Reactive fire can also be taken against units that declare a charge against them, but they fight weaker in the fight phase.
* In all cases, a unit can only shoot once per turn.

The above, taken collectively, preserves the IGOUGO structure of the game but weaves in options and choices for reactions and interrupting. It simulates simultaneous fire and alternating activations where it matters (in resolving shooting attacks) and makes shooting more comparable to assaulting in that regard (with both sides getting opportunities to fight). It has worked well in our games so far.

Very interesting, but it sounds quite time consuming. How do you make this go fast enough so as not to bogg the game down ? 40k has assault and psychic, as well as movement, so shooting can only take this long

I don't like the bookkeeping aspect of having to remember/mark who did what in previous turns. Units gaining markers they can use to do stuff later seem like a better concept than "if you did X, you later get a penalty when doing Y".
But outside of that, it's quite a cool concept.

The above, taken collectively, preserves the IGOUGO structure of the game but weaves in options and choices for reactions and interrupting. It simulates simultaneous fire and alternating activations where it matters (in resolving shooting attacks) and makes shooting more comparable to assaulting in that regard (with both sides getting opportunities to fight). It has worked well in our games so far.

Doesn't this penalize assault armies and buff shoting armies that have the option to buy cheap or very resilient units to capture objectives?

 addnid wrote:
Very interesting, but it sounds quite time consuming. How do you make this go fast enough so as not to bogg the game down ? 40k has assault and psychic, as well as movement, so shooting can only take this long

Well, these other options (overwatch and reactive fire) all function instead of your normal shooting attack. So you're really just changing the timing for when you resolve your attacks - it's not adding more attacks than you would take otherwise (unlike say overwatch in 8th/9th, which occurs in addition to your normal shooting).

Also, I should point out, that the shooting hit/wound/save process is totally revised in ProHammer and operates on the basis that all shooting from one unit to another, even with mixed weapons and armor, get rolled and resolved together. It dramatically speeds up the game - especially compared to 8th/9th where the rules only give clarity and assume you're rolling "one attack at a time" - which is painfully slow.

 Jidmah wrote:
I don't like the bookkeeping aspect of having to remember/mark who did what in previous turns. Units gaining markers they can use to do stuff later seem like a better concept than "if you did X, you later get a penalty when doing Y".
But outside of that, it's quite a cool concept.

We've never felt the need to keep meticulous track of this. Most of the time, it's only a few units that might be doing this, and a small token (or just remembering) isn't a big deal.

Karol wrote:

Doesn't this penalize assault armies and buff shoting armies that have the option to buy cheap or very resilient units to capture objectives?

Well, in ProHammer (based on 5th) there are plenty of other things that help counter balance this. Overwatch, is in exchange for shootigng during your own turn, so other than possible exposure differences, the shooting is just as powerful. Reactive fire works such that you shoot with your normal BS, but each model can only make a single ranged attack, even if its weapon would allow more (i.e. Rapid Fire weapons can only shoot once, even at close range, Assault 3 is treated as assault 1). On top of this, if you are assaulted after reactive fire you lose the benefit for being in cover and attack as WS1 - which means your opponent can actually hit you more easily when they charge in. Basically, against a charging unit, you'd only take reactive fire if you stand to kill more models shooting than you would in CC, because you're making yourself a bit weaker in CC. ProHammer also restores being able to consolidate into nearby enemy units after combat if you win, can assault from vehicles after they move (similar to 8th/9th again).

I'm curious what people are talking about when they mention increased lethality in 9th edition. Is it just the change to melta weapons? Or am I not seeing something else?

Alcibiades wrote:
I'm curious what people are talking about when they mention increased lethality in 9th edition. Is it just the change to melta weapons? Or am I not seeing something else?

average damage seems to be going up. Melta gets +2 in half range, which is higher on average than before. Macharius Vanquishers went from d6 damage to 9 damage. Regular vanquishers are 3+d3, lots of previously d6 guns are going to 3+d3. Heavy bolters went to 2, Incubi melee went to 2, 5 flat damage from the Silent King's guns, etc.

Damage numbers are either staying the same or getting bigger; we have not seen a nerf to damage numbers on any weapon.

There are also other factors: some weapons like chainswords or lightning claws (which also got +1A) gained better AP, or better range like all flamers. Vehicles can fire in combat or move and fire without penalties, defensive modifiers have been capped at -1 to hit, storm shields invuln dropped to 4++, etc...

At the same time only a few things became tougher, basically just firstborn dudes and just a few units lost the ability to re-roll failed hits/wounds as they're not CORE.

Alcibiades wrote:
I'm curious what people are talking about when they mention increased lethality in 9th edition. Is it just the change to melta weapons? Or am I not seeing something else?

Attacks in melee for a 15ppm assault marine squad in previous editions: 11 for a 5-man squad

Attacks in melee for an 18ppm assault intercessor squad: 21 for a 5-man squad, can opt to fight twice if they want for 42 total.

Generally, stuff hits more, hits for more damage, has more AP, cover is less effective (units that are not INFANTRY or Beasts can no longer interact with basic cover at all anymore, for example, so where previously if my tank got shot by a lascannon in an earlier edition if I was behind any terrain I'd have a 4++ basically, currently if i'm REALLY REALLY well positioned behind a very particular type of terrain I MIGHT get a total of -1 to hit) and 8th-9th adds the resource of stratagems and command points allowing units to frequently double their damage output at will several times per game.

1d6 + 2 is higher on average than roll 2d6 and choose the highest, but not by much.

I see the general point, though.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
That's what Overwatch was in 2nd iirc.

The problem with 2E overwatch was it led to standoffs where the first person to put their foot forward and move into range got blasted off the table. There needs to be some sort of cost (-1 to hit or somesuch) for using it versus firing in the normal phase or it becomes the 2E problem all over again.

 Stormonu wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
That's what Overwatch was in 2nd iirc.

The problem with 2E overwatch was it led to standoffs where the first person to put their foot forward and move into range got blasted off the table. There needs to be some sort of cost (-1 to hit or somesuch) for using it versus firing in the normal phase or it becomes the 2E problem all over again.

Maybe it's just me, but I imagine just driving/running a durable unit like terminators, MANz or a tank into the overwatchers and then take objectives. People have to move to interrupt objectives in 9th or they lose, which is the main reason why gunlines died.