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.

It's been bothering some of us in our gaming group that the average troop can keep up with the average tank. Even when the tank is moving flat out.(If nothing intervenes) The average troop can easily keep up and assault every turn. It gets worse with some HtH armies. I had an idea That would possibly end this without upsetting game balance and I'd like all of your opinion.


Here goes: Standard Tanks get an OVER REV or RED LINE rule.(Haven't settled on name yet)

This rule works just like RUN in that if the vehicle chooses to not fire in the shooting phase it geta an extra D6 of movement.
The drawback is that the crew is overtaxing the vehicle(Either the engine or the chassis/trads). So much so that if you roll a 1 or 2(Need your opinion)it counts as if you just failed a dangerous terrain test whilst moving 12"or over? (your opinion) and the vehicle is immobilized on the spot(Maybe wrecked?). If successful you get to move the distance rolled and you get the cover save.


Please tell me what you think about this Idea, Thanks


Edited for clarity and clearer title

Really guys. No comments. Dakka is letting me down on this one. Our gaming group is getting ready to play test this and was looking forward to your input.

I will add my two sense. This sound much like the old Blood angels rhino rules. I still loved that way of doing the old Rhino rush, but sense 3rd addition they killed it do to the fact it made assault to easy. (not saying assault from drop pods or fleeting marines with 18-24 in charge range is worse. The true disgusting is a possible 26 inch Terminator charge. 12in Land Raider Crusader move + 2 inch deployment + d6 in run + 6 assault charge because of Shriek. Excuse me but are not terminator slow?) I never thought the rules were bad. I would agree with what you are saying. The issue is this, GW said they would never do it again because of the old Rhino rush issue, eventhought the rules are worse

Thanks Astaldo,

How about on a D6 roll of 3? It becomes immobilized.

Or on the D6 roll of 1 to 2 the vehicle is wrecked with the squad inside Auto pinned/entangled for a turn with no special rule able to circumvent.

This can't be any worse than BikerNobs or Drop Pods, could it?

Is it possible that GW would reverse their stance given they are doing a lot of things that they said they wouldn't do again?

The old BA overcharged engines rule was fine. Just make it a dangerous terrain test, then you can move up to an additional 6 inches. If you fail the terrain test, the engine cracks up and you become immbolized on the spot. Skimmers that moved flat out becomed wrecked per the normal skimmer rules. You can imagine that the engine craps out and the vehicles velocity makes it impossible for the crew to land it safely. This would make transports faster than foot sloggers but also give an associated risk.

Does the movement happen during the movement phase or during the shooting phase? Is the tank able to make multiple tank shocks?

The old BA codex it occured in the movement phase and the last six inches were straight line only. Basically you could move 12, pivot, then overcharge for six in a straight line. The Rhinos were still bound by the straight line only restriction for tank shocking. I imagine you could word it the same now along the lines of: "At the end of its normal move, any vehicle (except walkers) may choose to overcharge its engines. Roll a d6. On a roll of 1, the engines have seized under the strain and the vehicle is immoblized in its current location. On a roll of 2-6, the vehicle may move up to an additional 6 inches in a straight line based on its current facing. A vehicle that declared a tank shock as part of its normal move will tank shock any additional units it runs into using the normal tank shock rules. A vehicle that declared a ram will count both its normal move and its overcharge move for the purposes of calculating the strength of the ram. Note that if a vehicle did not declare a tank shock or a ram, it must stop one inch away from enemy models as per the normal movement rules. Any vehicle that made an overcharged move may not shoot in the subsequent shooting phase, but may employ smoke launchers as normal."

The extra move should be handled in the shooting phase, just like a FF or run move, with the addition of a DT test.
In this way it leaves dis/embarking in the move phase, where it belongs.

OR

Do it in the assault phase, basically giving tanks a charge move, without close assault. With full dis/embarking freedom.
If you play BF Evo this should feel natural

Well, except for possible orcs, disembarking is a none issue. Troops cannot disembark from a vehicle that moves over 12 inches. Thus, since the overcharge is done at the end of the vehicles normal move then troops cannot disembark from it afterwards. Troops can always embark as normal. Under your version, I could conceivably move a vehicle 12 inches in one direction and pivot it where I want to go, move troops back six inches and embark them, then turbo charge the vehicle to carry the troops further away in the shooting phase after the troops shoot through the access points. Seems a little weird and could lead to alot of tracking on who shoot what and when that would lead to arguments. Especially if a tank tried to ram or tank shoot. I feel that my proposal is much simpler because it handles all the tanks movement at once.

We were thinking movement happened in the shooting phase but no extra Tank shock and this only applied to standard tanks and transports. Not fast ones or skimmers.

Though it wouldn't hurt to examine the concept.

I do think it should be reasonably easy to damage your tank doing this. And that there is enough of a penalty to discourage casual use of the over-rev/red line rule.(Which name sounds better anyway?...any ideas as to what this rule should be named?)

Friends and I are gonna House rule it at some point, just to see if it adds another heroic dimension to the game.

Simple fix, remove the run rule, now non-fast transports have a purpose again. I really hate the run rule, IMO, its a game breaker.

Problem is, even without run, the avg squad can keep up with and continuously assault the average tank moving at full speed.
This is reasoned as the tank stops to shoot. But what about a shaken Tank or one with no weapons anymore?

Thats why we were trying to work on this rule.

focused- the only problem I see with having the transport move in the shooting phase is that it can lead to a really screwy situation. For example, transport A moves 12 inches forward and pivots at an angle. Squad A disembarks from transport A. In the shooting phase, Squad A rapid fires on an enemy unit. Following the squad's fire, transport A Red Lines in a straight line and interposes itself between Squad A and the target it just fired up, blocking it from enemy fire the next turn and making it almost impossible to assault the Squad because you'd have to displace around the transport. Essentially, you remove the tactical decision to disembark and shoot or to stay in the transport for survivability from the game completely. Even if the Red Line test is failed, you suffer no consequences than if you had decided to disembark in a none Red Line game. If you let it occur in movement in conjunction with the normal movement rules (i.e. tank shock) than it would add more tactical decisions into the game and would allow for more heroic moments when the tank really needs to go 15-18 inches to push an enemy off an objective on the last turn.

P.S. I like Red Line better for the name.

I like it. I agree that the rule should prohibit disembarkation.
What problems does it bring up if its all done in the movement phase.

I can see one and thats Land Raider Ramming.

I think still in shooting phase with prohibitions on actions.

What do you think?

Simpler fix: cut infantry/bike ground movement in half:
- reduce infantry / walker movement to 3"
- run/fleet to d3"
- bikes 6" / turbo 12"

This makes it impossible for foot troops to ever keep pace with vehicles.

@DD, I'd love to see that, but the howls from the tyranids, orks, and sqace marines would be heard world wide(Sorta like the psychic scream when a norn queen dies).

It would upset the game balance to much against the tyranids. This could be fixed with a simple codex update but I don't see GW doing this.

I do kinda agree that movement is starting to out grow the avg game table a bit. Not fully there yet, but nudging up on it.

focusedfire wrote:@DD, I'd love to see that, but the howls from the tyranids, orks, and sqace marines would be heard world wide(Sorta like the psychic scream when a norn queen dies).

Why should Space marines (tanks) and orcs (trukks+tanks) howl ?

1hadhq- Because the maximum move of an Orc mob on foot would drop from 18 inches (6 move + 6 Waagh + 6 assault) to 9 inches (3 move + 3 Waagh + 3 assault). Huge difference. Same with foot based Marine armies.

I think everyone who didn't play a mechanized army would howl, because it's a really bad idea.

The OP's idea sounds good, except that part about "getting the cover save." Skimmers are the only vehicles that get a cover save for moving fast, and there's probably too many balance issues with giving it out to skimmers in this case.

Aside from this, making the movement happen in the movement phase, prohibiting disembarking, and making the extra movement unable to be combined with ramming should be okay.

What should the Red Lined blown engine fail roll be? On a 2? or 3? And should there be a fail table? Where on a rolled D6 X happens if you rolled Y....ect...

Personally I'm leaning towards on the movement roll of a 1 or 2 theres a problem. Maybe make the problems different.... the Engines blown, tracks thrown, or lost control with possible repairs later in game. Or is this overly complicated?

I'd think overly complicated. And failing on a 1 or 2 is a little harsh. The vehicle already suffers permanent damage if it fails---why double the risk?

The failure on a 1 or a 2 represents the difficulty of pushing equipement beyond its design and to keep the rule from being abused.

Heres the 2 ideas:

Red-lined:
Any non-fast vehicle sacrifices the future right to shoot, in that turn, in order to attempt an extra D6 inches in the movement phase. The vehicle fails on a D6 roll of 1 or 2 and if failed the vehicle still moves the extra distance (13-14"total distance to represent momentum) but is afterward immobilized.
Note: Passengers may not embark or disembark in the same turn after a red-lined attempt is declared/made.


Or the same as above but, "If the attempt is failed the vehicle moves the distance rolled and then makes one roll on the vehicle penetration table with no obscured/cover saves allowed.
Note: Wargear is still allowed to mitigate(Extra armor, track guards and what ever else overly-specific non-sense I have to put for the rules lawyers). Passengers are not allowed to embark or disembark in the same turn after a red-lined attempt is declared/made.


How does that sound?
Is there an area of exploitation if the vehicle is destroyed after red-lined and the passengers can't disembark?
Would that be to punitive or just the right amount of balance?
Or should the passengers just have to roll for damage and saves?

Your thoughts please. Thanks

Edited for clarity

Oh yeah, extra note to the second version of the rule.

If a weapon destroyed is rolled on the damage table it is the opponents choice, choosing from the secondary weapon systems first.

How does everyone feel about that?

This is in keeping with the WW1 feel for tanks, the IG tanks in particular. These tanks were slower than infantry. If 40K tanks moved at the speed of modern combat vehicles they could leave the table on turn 1, tankshocking all the way.

In order to keep the same scale, and keep vehicles from dominating, they cannot go too fast. Not everything can be a Wave Serpent with star engines.

Not expecting a wave serp with star engines. Not shooting for 36" of movement.
We(our gaming group) are asking for only the option for a possible 18" move with enough drawbacks to make it one of those desperate manuevers.

I understand the concept of the feel but, with the possible exception of the Leman Russ, truth is the IG is closer to WWII to vietnam in its construction and feel. Also, There are SMs, Orks, and even maybe Tau to consider.

The group and I are just trying to build and playtest some house rules that we feel would be more in keeping with the flavor of 40K.


Do you have any suggestion on the rule build?

I know its old but its mine so.... bump^.