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.

Ive been thinking about this for a while. IGOUGO has never sat that well with me. It just seems to be a relic of the 70's wargaming mentality back when WFB was first conceived.I appreciate that its a simple game mechanic and helps the game flow but, to me, it just doest seem right. I just never liked the fact that a unit could pop out of cover walk across the open fire their weapons a few times (In 40K) and then charge in. The opposing enemy stands about basically picking their nose. I know a few (non GW) games use opportunity fire and over watch but I think perhaps the time has come for a rethink.

Many historical systems for example conduct moving fire and/or combat simultaneously so there is simply 1 turn as opposed to player 1's turn followed by player 2's. Before this week I personally didn't see how something like this could be successfully incorporated into 40K and WFB without ruining the fast play nature of the games and having them still remaining accessible to the younger gamer.

However over the last week Ive been playing several games of WotR and my mind has been changed. I realize the non IGOUGO has been a staple of LotR for some time, but as much as I liked it I was never fully convinced that it would work outside of a small skirmish game like LotR. Well boy was I wrong!

To those unfamiliar with WotR let me summarize how the non IGOUGO movement in WotR works.

1) Players determine priority via a dice off.

2) The winner elects to go 1st or 2nd.

3)1st Player conducts all movement, charges do not occur here.

4)2nd player does the same.

5)1st player conducts shooting.

6)2nd player conducts shooting.

7)1st player charges.

8)2nd player charges.

9)All combats are now resolved. 1st player decides order in which combats are resolved.

Similar unit types (INf, Cav) types strike simultaneously. So a charge does not present the opportunity to kill enough so the enemy cannot strike back. The enemy is going to hit you back regardless.

Now I've found that this presents a whole series of tactical opportunities and considerations that currently don't exist in WFB and 40K.

For example not guaranteeing if you will be able to charge when you want to. The wrong dice role could see being charged instead of charging.

Counter maneuvering. The 2nd player will always have the chance to react to your movement before you commit to charging. They may reform their battle line, place an obstacle unit in your way or maneuver something to counter charge you in the flank when you charge. If the opposing player does something you didn't predict suddenly your whole plan may fall apart. That weak flank you were planning to exploit may suddenly be strengthened or supported. Leaving you exposed instead.

As a player you are forced to think of multiple potential moves you opponent may commit. If your thinking turns ahead you may have to cover all sorts of possibilities as each turn will be unpredictable in that you do not know if you will have the 1st move or not. You may not even want the first move, but your opponent may force you to have it.

Anyway my point is that this system, with a bit thought, could easily be applied to 40K or WFB. Given the amount of new tactical challenges it presents I think it would enrich both games.

I appreciate that changes to the mechanics would be inevitable, and given that the GW community are as stubborn as mules with regards to new ideas, I don't think this will ever happen. But I'm throwing this out there a food for thought.

Why dont you get a buddy together and try it out for a game of 40k and report back? It sounds like a good idea.

I'm a hater of IgoUgo... hate. hate.hate.
Alt activation I find make some of the challenging games
and example would be from a GW game: Epic Armageddon

In regards to the WotR system,
I think that it would benefit from unit initiatives
ie during movement the low initiative units move first and fire & charge 2nd

Look at how Epic handles the turn sequence. I think, although I might remember wrong, you take turns activating a unit. You can try to activate a second before giving the 'move' back to your opponent, but have to roll. I think Marines always do so on a 2+. Orks are a 4+, but if they're charging, they get a +2 to the die roll.

This seems to mirror what actual events could work like much more closely than a you go, I go type game. I seem to remember a Wild West type game that used a system very, very similiar to this with an additional twist. It used playing card randomly assigned to each unit face down that were then turned up at the beginning of the turn. You moved, shot and assaulted your units in that order.

I'd like play 40K in the manner described.

to Green-Git: Was it the Deadlands RPG?

Double post, mods please delete.

Belphegor wrote:to Green-Git: Was it the Deadlands RPG?

That's it, I think... but there seemed to be a lot of models for an RPG. I watched guys play it a lot in our FLGS.

I tried applying Aeronautica Imperalis rules to a game of 40k once (For those unfamiliar, it appears to be almost exactly the same as WotR, or what the OP describes).

The problem with this, we decided, was that it seems to favor shooty armies to the point of broken.

We may have just not given it enough play testing, but what it boiled down to was, the Ork player moves all their assualty type units (everything) right up to the ruins the Guardsmen are all huddled down in. The Guardsmen get a free round to obliterate half the Ork force with no-cover-save shooting. The Ork fails a charge, gets ANOTHER round of no-cover-save shooting. Tabled, turn 3.

Now maybe it was just IGOUGO tactics being deployed in a situation where such a thing just could not be done, but I can see alot of games of two armies sitting across from each other, waiting for the other player to walk into their range.

Still, I maintain that, with some tweaking, the system could work.

The OP makes me want to play War of the Ring. If only I could actually get people at my FLGS to play LotR. Right now it's all Battletech.

AlexCage wrote:The problem with this, we decided, was that it seems to favor shooty armies to the point of broken.

I'd think about using the LotR system. Movement, then Shoot, then melee. Difference is that you move into melee range in the move phase (although there is no extra distance for a charge). If you get into melee, that shuts down the shooting. That may not work ideally either, but it's a thought.

Well, I think that in the grimdark of the faruture SAFH armies will be favored against machete weilding maniacs. So the game system AlexCage tried out seems to be moving much more toward a sim than a game. Not so much fun for orc players. I think if you went to NIGOUGO (non-IGOUGO), you would have to re-tool a bit more than just the core rules (duh).

LotR sounding more like Fantasy in movement respect. Maybe take out run, institute double move march and charge, charge happens before shooting?

This is how 2nd ed was. Player one has the turn does his movement. Player two does his movement. Player one shoots. Player two shoots. Player one charges. Player two charges.
Players do there compulsory moves. End player one turn one. Player two turn one repeat with two going first.

sonofruss wrote:This is how 2nd ed was. Player one has the turn does his movement. Player two does his movement. Player one shoots. Player two shoots. Player one charges. Player two charges.
Players do there compulsory moves. End player one turn one. Player two turn one repeat with two going first.

2nd Edition of 40K was IGO-UGO, aside from Overwatch

The main problem with this is that the entire game would need to be rebuilt if it were to retain any form of balance. It would be like how the game is biased towards CC armies now, but even worse. The way things are now, CC would become totally worthless.

While I agree there are problems with a wholly UGOIGO system, it does have many benefits as described above.

One of the key benefits is that you can really coordinate the actions of your army, being able to use them in exactly the kind of combined arms that you want. However, because the other player can do nothing but watch and roll saves, it can get boring and a bit unfair.

Meanwhile alternating activation schemes have their own problems, such as the inability to really use unit combos that well, but players are always active and doing things.

A good balance needs to be struck somehow. Different sytems handle this in different ways to deal with the downsides to each method.

Warmachine is a pure IGOUGO, but everything is so deadly even if you wipe out large chunks of the opponent's army, he comes around and wipes out a similar chunk from your army.

Starship Troopers had a reaction system where if actions occured within 10" of a unit (or at different distances depending on abilities), that unit would get a reaction action.

Epic has a nice method where you can attempt to get extra actions by rolling a die, if you fail you pass the turn.

And, of course, all systems can just simply balance the other rules and armies for their method of handling things. Unfortunately 40k does have many balance issues in this regard, not really any more than other games, but the harsh IGOUGO system tends to highlight them more.

I'm really digging the WotR system for mass combat. I like Warmaster, but after a game or two of Wotr I'm liking it better.

I love the way Epic does things. I'd love to see some of those mechanics imported into 40K.

UGOIGO was dead long ago, sadly GW refuses to move with the times because it would mean considerable tweaking of their armies so that they function with any semblance of balance.

In some games UGOIGO functions well, such as warmahordes, but for 40K it is shown by such examples as AT-43 that you can have a very good system of alternating activation and initiative without resorting UGOIGO.

If GW instituted alternating activation I would have a lot less complaints about 40K because there would be considerably more tactics and maneuvering involved. Right now half of the game is getting a good well defined list as part of your base strategy. That kind of strategy will always be there, but alternating activation really puts the X factor in the tactics of a game that is otherwise quite predictable if both players know what they are doing.

I really doubt GW will ever institute alternate activation though. I figured Rackham showing how good that mechanic is would give GW reason to pause and reconsider its rules mechanics, but... GW makes miniatures for the sake of sales and not games for the sake of rules.

Thats what there other branches are for, such as warhammer ancients, etc.

At least its a little better in 5th ed, before you could set up (your most important parts) after your opponent and still have a fair chance to get round 1 and blast him off the crates. Nowdays you either have to size the initiative or use eldrad/deciver to pull it off.. Still I agree with everyone here, the system is really flawed.

Yeah, 5th ed is more or less better (if nothing else than in how it is worded) than previous editions.

Initiative isn't really a factor. (Hell, I almost always want to go second anyways...) The big deal is the turn structure itself. Initiative per turn is just icing on the alternate activation cake.

If I lose initiative in an alternate activation mechanic game, then I do not feel I am to be left in the dirt. They would only get to move/shoot/assault with one squad, not their entire army before I get to do anything.

If I got to "size the initiative" every game and knew it before hand I almost always would. Getting to deploy second and fire first can usually cripple your opponents army right from the start.

Sorry for bringing it abit offtopic in a way, but like I said, I also think they should move thowards something like the epic system.

The problem isn't IGOUGO as such it's the fact that everything can start so close together, which means that combat occurs from the first turn, reducing the need and opportunity for manoeuvre.

Kilkrazy wrote:The problem isn't IGOUGO as such it's the fact that everything can start so close together, which means that combat occurs from the first turn, reducing the need and opportunity for manoeuvre.

Alternating movement actions would greatly increase maneuvering.

Troops just wouldn't rush straight at the enemy knowing that with their move + assault that they'll make it safely in to CC. Yes, it's in part because of short distances but I can't help but feel some kind of alternating movement/impulse movement system would work extremely well in this game.

Of course the whole ruleset would have to be retooled.

Simultaneous movement, and simultaneous shooting combat resolution would be great.

I don't think oppurtunity fire/defensive fire/overwatch really needs to be worked in to 40K, though alternating movement turns (alternating moving units would be better) would be great.

And for what it's worth IGOUGO is practically dead in tactical board wargaming. Even the old beast ASL (Advanced Squad Leader) incorporates elements where both players are doing actions on a turn. Plenty of great systems out there with alternating or impulse movement: Conflict of Heroes, Combat Commander, Panzer Grenadier, etc, etc

Ultimately I just don't like IGOUGO in tactical games because it doesn't give me the sense that multiple things are going on in a battle at once. It feels more artificial to me, with one side taking actions, then the other side, and it sort of just goes back and forth and back and forth.

I've been thinking about experimenting with non-igougo turns in 40k since I first played at43 a few months ago. I'm not sure I like the AT-43 system but the way wotr is descrbed it's probably exactly what I am looking for.

It wouldn't be the end of the world to give gunlines an extra chance to shoot in current 40k. Maybe you'd have to tweak it so that you can only rapid fire every other turn, or you can only rapid fire when enemies are between 6 and 12" away. Or as dietrich said - allow units to catch you in the movement phase.

One of the big things with LOTR was using might to grab the initiative with heroic actions. It made things very, very tense. I liked that a lot, and I hope WOTR keeps it.

I think if you were going to have a realistic system for that in 40K you'd have to face up to the fact that orks and tyranids would need their numbers increased tenfold to stand a chance, and no one wants to play that army. Running headlong at a gunline doesn't work.

You've inspired me, LuciusAR. I'll try the system you've posted and come back with the results

I like the AP style/alternating unit activation of Dark AGe. if you are not familiar with it, check this out..


http://www.dark-age.com/downQSRules.php

oh and by the way, the models for that game are damn sweet.

Da Boss wrote:One of the big things with LOTR was using might to grab the initiative with heroic actions. It made things very, very tense. I liked that a lot, and I hope WOTR keeps it.

I think if you were going to have a realistic system for that in 40K you'd have to face up to the fact that orks and tyranids would need their numbers increased tenfold to stand a chance, and no one wants to play that army. Running headlong at a gunline doesn't work.

You assume all of the factions wouldn't get tweaks. A new turn order in 40K would probably necessitate a rebuilding/balancing of the forces.

40K doesn't necessarily need to be more "realistic" - I just think it needs something that isn't IGOUGO.

Adding alternating impulses/actions would probably be a little too much/require to me rebalancing, but simply shifting the game to a system where player 1 moves, player 2 moves, player 1 shoots, player 2 shoots, player 1 assaults, player 2 assaults and then switching it up so player 2 did all their actions first next turn, etc MIGHT be an improvement. Might be nice to see shooting effects be simultaneous like close combat if such a system came about.

My all-time favorite games were alternative activation (Warzone, Confrontation, etc).

The problem with mass-battles IGOUGO is that your opponent can move/shoot everything (and being mass-battles, that's usually a lot of stuff), and there ain't jack you can do about it. They even removed Overwatch from the game (which I miss very much). It wasn't uncommon in the 'old days' - and as I've seen recently, it's not even uncommon now - for the player who goes second to lose a significant portion of their force even before they have their first turn. To me, this greatly trivializes maneuver to a degree.

Like many, I detest IGOUGO. I firmly believe the sole reason GW continues with it is for simplicity sake: younger players might get a little too 'confused' with alternating activations. Warhammer is built around the IGOUGO mechanic, though, and I don't think it'd be that simple to make a quick & easy move to alternate activation without some serious design considerations.

Depsite the decades rolling by, though, I hold out hope one day GW will have the cajones to give it a go and actually design a 40k edition around the concept.

Just my 2 isk, tho.