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.

I was thinking in my long hours of boredom wouldn't it be cool if ig officers could expand their selection of orders. Here are a few I made up:

Pummel them to dust!: May only be used on an artillery unit (counts as ld 8) if successfully passed they gain 1+ bs for the shooting phase.
Grenades!: Select one infantry unit with frag grenades as wargear. If the ld test is passed the unit may throw D6 frag grenades with the following profile: str3 ap6 range6" blast. One a unit has used this order it counts as having used its grenades so therefore may throw no more for the rest of the game and loses the frag grenades benefit for assaulting into cover.
FIRE EVERYTHING!: This order requires no command radius and may be issued to any and every unit you control (tanks and artillery count as ld8 or ld9 with pask) and may only be used once per game. If the test is successfully passed the unit it was issued to receives an extra shot on all weapons. On the players next turn every unit which passed its previous test and got an extra shot must take another test. If this is failed the unit will lose a shot from its weapons. (if it only has one shot it may not fire) e.g a heavy bolter team received 4 shots instead of the normal 3 but this could be reduced to only 2 shots if the test is failed.
Watch your step!: A unit receiving this order treats all dangerous terrain as difficult instead and receives an extra D6 when moving through it.

I would love to hear any ideas you have for orders.

vodo40k wrote:
FIRE EVERYTHING!: This order requires no command radius and may be issued to any and every unit you control (tanks and artillery count as ld8 or ld9 with pask) and may only be used once per game. If the test is successfully passed the unit it was issued to receives an extra shot on all weapons. On the players next turn every unit which passed its previous test and got an extra shot must take another test. If this is failed the unit will lose a shot from its weapons. (if it only has one shot it may not fire) e.g a heavy bolter team received 4 shots instead of the normal 3 but this could be reduced to only 2 shots if the test is failed.

Just no. Period.

Why you ask? Well I shall give you a scenario:

Turn 3: You are playing a footslogging IG gunline, that is about to have the majority of the line crashed into by a wave of Orks the next turn. You issue the Order to the units about to be assaulted and pass the Ld test. You proceed to fire one extra shot with every weapon, and either destroy the assaulting unit, or are engaged in assault the next turn.

In this all-to-common scenario (units about to be engaged in assault), the Order could be terribly abused, without any downside to it.

Ok agreed but is there another way to express ig firing everything to risk running out of amo?

vodo40k wrote:Ok agreed but is there another way to express ig firing everything to risk running out of amo?

No unit in the game of 40k has to worry about that in 5th edition, with the exception of the "single shot" units. The order as you presented it has a huge loophole in it, and that was my critique. Do I have any suggestions??

"First Rank Fire! Second Rank Fire!" seems to work just fine.

How about this;

Life is cheap:
You may issue this order only to a squad of guardsmen or conscripts. If the test is passed, the unit may fire into the closest combat. for every hit rolled, roll a D6. on a 4+ proceed as normal. On a 1,2 or 3 the other unit participating in cc is hit, resolved as a shooting hit. Also, this order may never be used to fire into a combat involving a CCS or a PCS, to represent their loyalty to their leaders.

Warboss Gutrip wrote:How about this;

Life is cheap:
You may issue this order only to a squad of guardsmen or conscripts. If the test is passed, the unit may fire into the closest combat. for every hit rolled, roll a D6. on a 4+ proceed as normal. On a 1,2 or 3 the other unit participating in cc is hit, resolved as a shooting hit. Also, this order may never be used to fire into a combat involving a CCS or a PCS, to represent their loyalty to their leaders.

Again, this as been discussed before. No.

What if my squad of Guardsmen is ordered to fire into a Close Combat? In that close combat is a single Guardsman, locked with 5 Tactical Marines...
Terribly unbalanced.

Also, despite the 50-50 chance of hitting your own men, this will spell quite a number against assault-oriented armies.

As a final thought: Why should IG get it, and not other armies?
-A TON of other armies out there could justify having this rule...if they can't get it, then there's no reason that IG should.

Che-Vito wrote:

vodo40k wrote:
FIRE EVERYTHING!: This order requires no command radius and may be issued to any and every unit you control (tanks and artillery count as ld8 or ld9 with pask) and may only be used once per game. If the test is successfully passed the unit it was issued to receives an extra shot on all weapons. On the players next turn every unit which passed its previous test and got an extra shot must take another test. If this is failed the unit will lose a shot from its weapons. (if it only has one shot it may not fire) e.g a heavy bolter team received 4 shots instead of the normal 3 but this could be reduced to only 2 shots if the test is failed.

Just no. Period.
Why you ask? Well I shall give you a scenario:
Turn 3: You are playing a footslogging IG gunline, that is about to have the majority of the line crashed into by a wave of Orks the next turn. You issue the Order to the units about to be assaulted and pass the Ld test. You proceed to fire one extra shot with every weapon, and either destroy the assaulting unit, or are engaged in assault the next turn.
In this all-to-common scenario (units about to be engaged in assault), the Order could be terribly abused, without any downside to it.

Well, that is kind of the point, Che. The Imperial Guard's greatest weakness is heavy assault armies. They completely wreak IG gun lines! Even in a vacuum, the Imperial Guard has an uphill battle relying on poor tactical choices and unfortunate dice rolls on the part of their opponent. Granted, that also relies on a 'generic' commander, a good IG player will have better luck, but you can't use that in a vacuum. So the idea of "FIRE EVERYTHING" is actually quite good, but I would hazard to say it can only apply to weapons without a blast or template attribute by infantry, and may not apply to Ordinance and Template weapons on vehicles (blast permitted on vehicles).

From a fluff standpoint, it makes a lot of sense and I can easily see a front-line commander crying "FIRE!" while swinging their sword over their head pointed at the enemy! Seems like a very fun idea.

However, as a "free" option, it is over powered. So I would say it be reserved for a special character, or have a greater drawback. For instance;

FIRE EVERYTHING!: This is a two owning player turn Order that may only be used by one commander (selected by the owning player upon use/beginning of the game) once per game. Selected units must first pass a leadership test (Vehicles count as Ld9, vehicles with Pask count as Ld10), if successful, they may not fire or assault that turn, they may run, but must do so immediately. If failed, they perform as normal (they may shoot, run, assault, etc... as normal). In the following turn each unit that passed its test and is not locked in close combat or pinned, at the end of all other orders (units that were nominated and have been recovered by "Get Back In the Fight" may participate, but no nominated unit may take any other sort of order) may fire an additional round per weapon.

Che-Vito wrote:

Warboss Gutrip wrote:How about this;
Life is cheap:
You may issue this order only to a squad of guardsmen or conscripts. If the test is passed, the unit may fire into the closest combat. for every hit rolled, roll a D6. on a 4+ proceed as normal. On a 1,2 or 3 the other unit participating in cc is hit, resolved as a shooting hit. Also, this order may never be used to fire into a combat involving a CCS or a PCS, to represent their loyalty to their leaders.

Again, this as been discussed before. No.
What if my squad of Guardsmen is ordered to fire into a Close Combat? In that close combat is a single Guardsman, locked with 5 Tactical Marines...
Terribly unbalanced.
Also, despite the 50-50 chance of hitting your own men, this will spell quite a number against assault-oriented armies.
As a final thought: Why should IG get it, and not other armies?
-A TON of other armies out there could justify having this rule...if they can't get it, then there's no reason that IG should.

Let me stop you right there, Che. At 50-50 this is a pretty balanced rule. Again, assault is the Guard's major weakness and they have no truly, even half decent, counter-assault units. This rule makes a commander choose whether or not the assaulted unit is worthwhile saving, sometimes they are and there is always the chance they will escape from combat.

Fluffwise, it also makes a lot of sense over other armies. I can only think of Orks being possibly willing to do this, and even with them it is questionable. All the others consider their brothers and sisters and "it's" in arms as having some sort of value, Space Marines, Eldar, Necrons, Dark Eldar (maybe, can't really tell to be honest, there is scant fluff on the matter), Tau (especially Tau!), Sisters, Inquisitors, Demon Hunters.... So we're left with Orks and Tyranids.

Tyranids LIVE for close combat! It is pretty much their one purpose in being; to closing with the enemy, and eating them. For Orks; they love getting in face-to-face and bashing their opponents to a mushy pulp! So I would think when they see other Orks fighting hand-to-hand, they would be more likely to drop what else they are doing and charge in as well. Lest they be shown up as cowards or miss a good fight!

Space Marines wouldn't do it except for extremely specific situations (can't really think of any) and would more likely go in to save their buds! Eldar, dying race and all, would probably want to save their dwindling population rather than mow them down (again, specific situations excluded). I don't think Necrons would, they aren't that creative in general. Dark Eldar, they might, they might not, though I would think they are more interested in capturing victims than blasting away their own guys. Now Tau, they love each other too much to shoot a compadre in the back! That wouldn't sit well with them and their "Greater Good" philosophy. Sisters follow the same general reason Marines do. Same thing for Inquisitors and Demon Hunters. As for Demons and Chaos, Demons have few firing weapons and have a love for close combat like the Orks, so not really worth it for them, and Chaos are on the same page as the Eldar, there is a finite number of Chaos Space Marines, in general. Plus I don't think the Chaos Gods would want their powers wasted as such. Or maybe they would delight in it? It is 50-50 on that one, probably.

Which finally brings us to the Imperial Guard. Well, it is well established in the fluff that Imperial commanders are willing to blow away a lot of their own to kill some of the enemy. Heck, the current codex has one such commander as a Platoon Officer! Chenkov, or whats-it! So of course there would be commanders willing to massacre their own guys when it looks dismal for them! They are willing to let a whole battalion be wiped out so a General can get his favorite tea cup back! Why WOULDN'T they shoot into an assault containing their own guys who are more likely (well, maybe a 10% chance) to be killed anyway?

Granted, probably not meant for every IG commander. It should probably be placed on a Special Character and pointed appropriately, though I would imagine it should be rather cheap. It is a fair trade considering the other orders. It is a poor excuse to simply say "but nobody else has it ." Go cry me a river, build a bridge, and get the hell over it (I'm not targeting you, specifically, Che)! It is fluffy, it is fair (50-50), and it is fun. There are not many problems with it. It would actually make sense to open it up to vehicles as well, such as Hellhounds and Russes, at Ld9 or some such and count casualties equally for templates and blasts (if three enemy models and five Guardsmen are hit, then that is what you roll for). I never understood why you couldn't fire into close combat under any circumstances.

FIRE EVERYTHING!: This is a two owning player turn Order that may only be used by one commander (selected by the owning player upon use/beginning of the game) once per game. Selected units must first pass a leadership test (Vehicles count as Ld9, vehicles with Pask count as Ld10), if successful, they may not fire or assault that turn, they may run, but must do so immediately. If failed, they perform as normal (they may shoot, run, assault, etc... as normal). In the following turn each unit that passed its test and is not locked in close combat or pinned, at the end of all other orders (units that were nominated and have been recovered by "Get Back In the Fight" may participate, but no nominated unit may take any other sort of order) may fire an additional round per weapon.

I like this but an extra round seems a bit too much, I think just one extra shot is fine. Also I agree this order could only be used by a special home-brew commander, sort of like creed.

As for shooting into combat, I think the rule itself is fine but is a bit unfair on other races (excluding fluff) this should only be a once a game order.

vodo40k wrote:

FIRE EVERYTHING!: This is a two owning player turn Order that may only be used by one commander (selected by the owning player upon use/beginning of the game) once per game. Selected units must first pass a leadership test (Vehicles count as Ld9, vehicles with Pask count as Ld10), if successful, they may not fire or assault that turn, they may run, but must do so immediately. If failed, they perform as normal (they may shoot, run, assault, etc... as normal). In the following turn each unit that passed its test and is not locked in close combat or pinned, at the end of all other orders (units that were nominated and have been recovered by "Get Back In the Fight" may participate, but no nominated unit may take any other sort of order) may fire an additional round per weapon.

I like this but an extra round seems a bit too much, I think just one extra shot is fine. Also I agree this order could only be used by a special home-brew commander, sort of like creed.

As for shooting into combat, I think the rule itself is fine but is a bit unfair on other races (excluding fluff) this should only be a once a game order.

Be aware that this discussion has been had in the past...Skinnattittar more or less believes that IG should have all of the coolest rules out there. That being said, I've made my points, and he'll make his. As if IG isn't doing well enough already?

I'll try to post a link of the last time he discussed the point over and over, and more or less, it boils down to his belief that IG deserves it the most, and the breaking assault-oriented armies is okay. (keep in mind, my biggest force is Tau...assault-armies are my bane, but I don't want to make new rules just to screw them over).

vodo40k wrote:

FIRE EVERYTHING!: This is a two owning player turn Order that may only be used by one commander (selected by the owning player upon use/beginning of the game) once per game. Selected units must first pass a leadership test (Vehicles count as Ld9, vehicles with Pask count as Ld10), if successful, they may not fire or assault that turn, they may run, but must do so immediately. If failed, they perform as normal (they may shoot, run, assault, etc... as normal). In the following turn each unit that passed its test and is not locked in close combat or pinned, at the end of all other orders (units that were nominated and have been recovered by "Get Back In the Fight" may participate, but no nominated unit may take any other sort of order) may fire an additional round per weapon.

I like this but an extra round seems a bit too much, I think just one extra shot is fine. Also I agree this order could only be used by a special home-brew commander, sort of like creed.
As for shooting into combat, I think the rule itself is fine but is a bit unfair on other races (excluding fluff) this should only be a once a game order.

I only meant it to be during one turn; Turn (n+1) - Order given to units A, B, C, and D. Units A, B, and C pass checks, may not fire for the rest of the turn, unit D fails, may act as normal, in the shooting phase unit C Runs D6". Turn (n+2) - Unit A and B suffered casualties during turn (n+1). Unit A was pinned, Unit B fled 6". 'Get Back In the Fight!' was issued to both units, unit A failed and remains pinned (may not participate and loses FIRE EVERYTHING!), unit B passed and may participate as if nothing happened. Units B and C fire immediately with +1 shot on all non-blast (if infantry), Template, and Ordinance weapons.

"FIRE EVERYTHING" = Bladestorm with chance to negate the loss of the next shot. Have fun convincing anyone other than your best friends to even let you test that.

I suggest also a leadership penalty for the test(-2/-3)

Che-Vito wrote:Skinnattittar more or less believes that IG should have all of the coolest rules out there. That being said, I've made my points, and he'll make his. As if IG isn't doing well enough already?

I'll try to post a link of the last time he discussed the point over and over, and more or less, it boils down to his belief that IG deserves it the most, and the breaking assault-oriented armies is okay. (keep in mind, my biggest force is Tau...assault-armies are my bane, but I don't want to make new rules just to screw them over).

That is untrue and completely unfair thing to say. The Imperial Guard are still one of the harder armies to play, if not the hardest of the main line, basic, armies. If you are having trouble defeating even a competent IG list then there is something inherently wrong with your's. The only two IG players I know of who win a reasonable ratio of battles are myself and one of the other IG purist players at my local hobby shop. We have three or four other veteran IG players (one has been playing Imperial Guard since they were the Imperial Army!), and they only win a fraction of the time, and usually against the green players (or Tau, IG seems to have a pretty good time against Tau). This argument can fill several other threads, but usually boils down to one side just repeating "IG are the cheese!" and the other arguing with a wall. No matter how much you argue with a wall, it won't matter because it isn't listening....

But on this matter, the Imperial Guard have very few special rules, considering the new direction GW is setting with their codices. With the exception of Orders and the two Pysker units, most are detrimental to the base stats, others confer Universal Special Rules (USR). And really, despite my distaste for Robin Cruddace's butchering of some of the units in the Codex, the thing is actually pretty well balanced in its own right, and most of the rules are pretty clear, simple, easy to use, not very prone to subterfuge, but generally not influential. The only two interesting and useful ones are First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire! and Get Back In the Fight! So creating new, inventive, and fun special rules to replace the other more drab and boring/useless ones, I think is important.

FIRE EVERYTHING! is not only fluffy, fun, and potentially useful, but would be really fun to say! Just imagine when your opponent asks what you are planning to do during the Shooting Phase and the first words out of your mouth are "FIRE EVERYTHING!" with a fanciful flash of the arm and pointing at his line of models! Quite entertaining, me thinks.

If you want an anti-assault order, how about something which mimics the difficult terrain effect of the Thunderfire's Subterranean Blast shells, i.e. any unit hit moves as if in difficult terrain their next turn.

That would assist anyone trying to paly gunline style a fair bit I would think.

Jack

P.S. I'd not suggest anything allowing orders for vehicles, as thats pretty far outside their original function.

Jackmojo wrote:I'd not suggest anything allowing orders for vehicles, as thats pretty far outside their original function.

Definitely something to consider.

Well, now that you mention it, something similiar could be an order such as:

Covering Fire!

The nominated unit forgoes accuracy for a mass expenditure of ammunition! The shear volume of fire is meant to make any enemy reconsider venturing far out of cover, or to attempt to launch a blatant assault through such a hell storm of munitions.

Choose a single unit of at least ten models with at least one model armed with a lasgun or shotgun. Choose an enemy unit within line of sight and range. No shots are fired, but the targeted unit must take test on their leadership (note that this ignores special rules like Fearless, or rules where a unit automatically passes any test, even the fearless are not foolish!). If they fail they may not be chosen to move in the following turn. If they pass, they will count as moving through Dangerous Terrain in their following movement phase! May not be used against vehicles and Monstrous Creatures. The nominated unit may not fire their weapons in the turn they given the order. For all purposes they count as having fired their weapons.

Skinnattittar wrote:

Che-Vito wrote:Skinnattittar more or less believes that IG should have all of the coolest rules out there. That being said, I've made my points, and he'll make his. As if IG isn't doing well enough already?

I'll try to post a link of the last time he discussed the point over and over, and more or less, it boils down to his belief that IG deserves it the most, and the breaking assault-oriented armies is okay. (keep in mind, my biggest force is Tau...assault-armies are my bane, but I don't want to make new rules just to screw them over).

That is untrue and completely unfair thing to say. The Imperial Guard are still one of the harder armies to play, if not the hardest of the main line, basic, armies. If you are having trouble defeating even a competent IG list then there is something inherently wrong with your's. The only two IG players I know of who win a reasonable ratio of battles are myself and one of the other IG purist players at my local hobby shop. We have three or four other veteran IG players (one has been playing Imperial Guard since they were the Imperial Army!), and they only win a fraction of the time, and usually against the green players (or Tau, IG seems to have a pretty good time against Tau). This argument can fill several other threads, but usually boils down to one side just repeating "IG are the cheese!" and the other arguing with a wall. No matter how much you argue with a wall, it won't matter because it isn't listening....

But on this matter, the Imperial Guard have very few special rules, considering the new direction GW is setting with their codices. With the exception of Orders and the two Pysker units, most are detrimental to the base stats, others confer Universal Special Rules (USR). And really, despite my distaste for Robin Cruddace's butchering of some of the units in the Codex, the thing is actually pretty well balanced in its own right, and most of the rules are pretty clear, simple, easy to use, not very prone to subterfuge, but generally not influential. The only two interesting and useful ones are First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire! and Get Back In the Fight! So creating new, inventive, and fun special rules to replace the other more drab and boring/useless ones, I think is important.

FIRE EVERYTHING! is not only fluffy, fun, and potentially useful, but would be really fun to say! Just imagine when your opponent asks what you are planning to do during the Shooting Phase and the first words out of your mouth are "FIRE EVERYTHING!" with a fanciful flash of the arm and pointing at his line of models! Quite entertaining, me thinks.

And again, you have suggested that the IG get a special rule that nobody else gets on a large scale, that is quite a big deal! You have done exactly as my post stated.

Perhaps "some people" are having trouble playing IG. I've had no such trouble myself, and the recent tourney results seem to suggest something quite contrary to your statements. THAT speaks much louder than an IG players assertions that their army needs yet more to win...I know mine sure doesn't!

Che-Vito wrote:And again, you have suggested that the IG get a special rule that nobody else gets on a large scale, that is quite a big deal! You have done exactly as my post stated.

Perhaps "some people" are having trouble playing IG. I've had no such trouble myself, and the recent tourney results seem to suggest something quite contrary to your statements. THAT speaks much louder than an IG players assertions that their army needs yet more to win...I know mine sure doesn't!

You have said that I say that the IG need MORE special rules to have a greater chance at winning on the table. However I say that IG COULD use some more special rules that both play into their fluff (making them more fun as an army) and play into their weaknesses.

I do not know the recent tourney results since the codex came out (I would only look at the top four players, not the results in general), but I do know what the buzz has been from people who go to other stores and are from other places and although the IG are sweeping an aggregate of players, they are not sweeping the higher ranking players, and are not really making a dent either. Considering this is a new codex, that is a bit of a surprise, as they usually sweep the boards.

As for people major issues playing AGAINST IG, is that many people approach them as they did before their new codex, which doesn't work because they have more boots and move movement. Another problem is that they treat them completely different, which is also folly as they are the same boots and treads. Exploit the fact that what they can move is rather weak and that their boots on the ground are just cheaper but the same boots as before, and their treads are the same as well from an attacking standpoint, then you can beat them to a rather similar tune as before. That is just what I have seen and heard.

If an ability is properly costed, then it will not cheese an army. If it is improperly costed (like Ogryns or the stealth pods that the Tau have for their tanks), then the unit will be cheesed (notice I did not say army, as I know the Tau are having things a little rough at the moment).

Skinnattittar wrote:

Che-Vito wrote:And again, you have suggested that the IG get a special rule that nobody else gets on a large scale, that is quite a big deal! You have done exactly as my post stated.

Perhaps "some people" are having trouble playing IG. I've had no such trouble myself, and the recent tourney results seem to suggest something quite contrary to your statements. THAT speaks much louder than an IG players assertions that their army needs yet more to win...I know mine sure doesn't!

You have said that I say that the IG need MORE special rules to have a greater chance at winning on the table. However I say that IG COULD use some more special rules that both play into their fluff (making them more fun as an army) and play into their weaknesses.

If an ability is properly costed, then it will not cheese an army. If it is improperly costed (like Ogryns or the stealth pods that the Tau have for their tanks), then the unit will be cheesed (notice I did not say army, as I know the Tau are having things a little rough at the moment).

Having IG be the only army that can do this would be incredibly broken. That's been my main point thus far. If ANY army could do it, for that matter, then some major overhaul would have to be done with assault-oriented armies, to keep them in the game.

Che-Vito wrote:

Skinnattittar wrote:

Che-Vito wrote:And again, you have suggested that the IG get a special rule that nobody else gets on a large scale, that is quite a big deal! You have done exactly as my post stated.
Perhaps "some people" are having trouble playing IG. I've had no such trouble myself, and the recent tourney results seem to suggest something quite contrary to your statements. THAT speaks much louder than an IG players assertions that their army needs yet more to win...I know mine sure doesn't!

You have said that I say that the IG need MORE special rules to have a greater chance at winning on the table. However I say that IG COULD use some more special rules that both play into their fluff (making them more fun as an army) and play into their weaknesses.
If an ability is properly costed, then it will not cheese an army. If it is improperly costed (like Ogryns or the stealth pods that the Tau have for their tanks), then the unit will be cheesed (notice I did not say army, as I know the Tau are having things a little rough at the moment).

Having IG be the only army that can do this would be incredibly broken. That's been my main point thus far. If ANY army could do it, for that matter, then some major overhaul would have to be done with assault-oriented armies, to keep them in the game.

Which one are you talking about? You seem to be forgetting that most other armies are not gun line based like the Imperial Guard. In fact, NO army is gun line based LIKE the Imperial Guard. The Tau have their similarities, but they are different. Their command and control system is different. Their experience in full scale war is limited compared to the Imperial Guard's! I am not saying I am opposed to other armies getting rules like these. But it should fit them.

Will rules like this neuter assault armies a bit? Yes. But that is the point.

Find : Weakness
Make : Solution

Once this is done, you can then assess your solution.

Is it viable? Meaning, can it be done.

Does it work? Meaning will it achieve the desired effect.

Does it fit? This is context specific. In 40k, does it make sense for x to have y.

Can it be made practical? Context specific. In 40k, is it points costed properly/make available properly.

Now if you, Che, being the major opponent of these suggestions, could kindly raise points other than "it will break little red wagons" that show that these SUGGESTIONS do not reach any of the desired points, or some desired points (again, please other than "it will break little red wagons" ), others may begin to assess what you are trying to say. If not, then I believe this argument is over.

You made a long post there...I am going to sum up my answer in bold faced quotations:

Che-Vito's Challenge wrote: If you are suggesting that the IG, or other armies be given the option to fire into assaults, with the rules you have listed, then I challenge you to present the following:

-rules for other armies that could use a boost, that also rely on shooting (it seems you do not intend on giving the IG rule to the Tau)
-rules that will help assault-armies cope with this change, whether it is Codex specific, or BGB sweeping changes

If you can provide something like that, that can be discussed for balance issues and such, then I would be perfectly open to it. Just giving this rule as an availible thing to the IG without these kinds of changes is something that I could never agree to play against.

I propose a new thread! Let's get to work on this!

Che-Vito wrote:You made a long post there...I am going to sum up my answer in bold faced quotations:

Che-Vito's Challenge wrote: If you are suggesting that the IG, or other armies be given the option to fire into assaults, with the rules you have listed, then I challenge you to present the following:

-rules for other armies that could use a boost, that also rely on shooting (it seems you do not intend on giving the IG rule to the Tau)
-rules that will help assault-armies cope with this change, whether it is Codex specific, or BGB sweeping changes

If you can provide something like that, that can be discussed for balance issues and such, then I would be perfectly open to it. Just giving this rule as an availible thing to the IG without these kinds of changes is something that I could never agree to play against.

I propose a new thread! Let's get to work on this!

If we are on the subject of just firing into assaults, then no. I do not think fluff-wise (a major driving force on that subject, in my opinion) other armies have fluffy reasons to do it. Or, at least, NEARLY as much as the Imperial Guard, where, as the name for that rule, Life is Cheap. None of the other armies embody that idea as much as the Imperial Guard does, not even the Orks or the Tyranids where life seems to be free. Somehow, a Guardsmen's life is even cheaper than that! Which makes sense, I guess, as it costs gold to keep a Guardsmen alive, while Tyranids either consume their foes or die and Orks... well that issue is never really covered, but they can always eat their foes (which they do) or grots, if nothing else is appetizing....

Skinnattittar wrote:

Che-Vito wrote:You made a long post there...I am going to sum up my answer in bold faced quotations:

Che-Vito's Challenge wrote: If you are suggesting that the IG, or other armies be given the option to fire into assaults, with the rules you have listed, then I challenge you to present the following:

-rules for other armies that could use a boost, that also rely on shooting (it seems you do not intend on giving the IG rule to the Tau)
-rules that will help assault-armies cope with this change, whether it is Codex specific, or BGB sweeping changes

If you can provide something like that, that can be discussed for balance issues and such, then I would be perfectly open to it. Just giving this rule as an availible thing to the IG without these kinds of changes is something that I could never agree to play against.

I propose a new thread! Let's get to work on this!

If we are on the subject of just firing into assaults, then no. I do not think fluff-wise (a major driving force on that subject, in my opinion) other armies have fluffy reasons to do it. Or, at least, NEARLY as much as the Imperial Guard, where, as the name for that rule, Life is Cheap. None of the other armies embody that idea as much as the Imperial Guard does, not even the Orks or the Tyranids where life seems to be free. Somehow, a Guardsmen's life is even cheaper than that! Which makes sense, I guess, as it costs gold to keep a Guardsmen alive, while Tyranids either consume their foes or die and Orks... well that issue is never really covered, but they can always eat their foes (which they do) or grots, if nothing else is appetizing....

I would argue that almost every race, would, at some point or another, justify firing into an assault. Orks and Tyranids seem to me, just as likely as IG to do so. If the disagreement is over fluff, then I can only suggest that you revisit yours.

The question when it comes to rules is how likely are those races to actually do it? Otherwise, people will do it whenever they think it is most beneficial to them, not when they think their army would do it. As I said earlier, Orks MIGHT do it, Tyranids MIGHT do it, but there is little in the way of fluff to support that, especially compared to the Imperial Guard where they make mention even in the codex of the massive sacrifices made of Guardsmen for "greater causes." Please see my earlier post for that justification.

I will abridge it here: Tyranids thrive on close combat and have few weapons and creativity to do such. Orks also thrive on combat and are more interested in bashing their opponents in hand-to-hand than they are in shooting their opponent. Orks would much rather participate in hand-to-hand combat than avoid it and shoot the other boyz in the back (dat's noit rite! -supposed to be in orkish speak...-).

So Orks MIGHT do it under certain circumstances, but in general, I don't think they would engage in close combat if they thought their buddies were just going to shoot them in the back (they would probably start firing back at them! So you would need another, Ork specific, rule about how the boyz who survive react to those that shot them!). That is just my opinion though.

Skinnattittar wrote:The question when it comes to rules is how likely are those races to actually do it? Otherwise, people will do it whenever they think it is most beneficial to them, not when they think their army would do it. As I said earlier, Orks MIGHT do it, Tyranids MIGHT do it, but there is little in the way of fluff to support that, especially compared to the Imperial Guard where they make mention even in the codex of the massive sacrifices made of Guardsmen for "greater causes." Please see my earlier post for that justification.

I will abridge it here: Tyranids thrive on close combat and have few weapons and creativity to do such. Orks also thrive on combat and are more interested in bashing their opponents in hand-to-hand than they are in shooting their opponent. Orks would much rather participate in hand-to-hand combat than avoid it and shoot the other boyz in the back (dat's noit rite! -supposed to be in orkish speak...-).

So Orks MIGHT do it under certain circumstances, but in general, I don't think they would engage in close combat if they thought their buddies were just going to shoot them in the back (they would probably start firing back at them! So you would need another, Ork specific, rule about how the boyz who survive react to those that shot them!). That is just my opinion though.

Well, I am looking for a general consensus from Dakka, on the issue. We both have our own opinions, but we'll see what the broader spectrum thinks. I just started a poll in the Backround section about this very topic.

Here is an interesting fact for you; the 'life is cheap' rule that I designed is very similar to a universal rule in LOTR: strategy battle game and it by NO MEANS breaks the game. In fact, more often than not, players do not elect to do it, due to the risks involved. The only changes to the rule that I have made is enforcing a Ld check and making the rule an order.

Whilst I agree that, in certain situations, doing this would be a no-brainer, those circumstances are in fact very rare. This rule would be unfair if guard had a resilient unit, possibly with a 2+ save, that could tie up their most dangerous foes in close combat whilst the rest of the army whittles them down. However, guard possess no such thing! Also, the rule would be broken if you could target enemy elites in close combat with little risk to your side, such as the participant on your side being a squad of guardsmen. I would like to remind you that, as a general principle, the enemy elites will not be fighting guardsmen, but rather attempting to assasinate command squads, and the rule itself stops you from firing in that circumstance.

If anything, this rule makes guard worse, as it will cause a foe to concerntrate on assisinating command squads, breaking up the morale chain, and screwing around with guard players minds.

Finally, I can guarantee that this rule is not unfair, as for a short period of time, one of my friends misinterpreted the FRF,SRF order, thinking that it meant all weapons in the ordered squad got an extra shot. This was powerful, but not unbeatable, and whilst you would think 'broken' it was not, in fact unstoppable.

My proposed rule pales in comparison to that, and is, as such, not broken or OP.

Warboss Gutrip wrote:Here is an interesting fact for you; the 'life is cheap' rule that I designed is very similar to a universal rule in LOTR: strategy battle game and it by NO MEANS breaks the game. In fact, more often than not, players do not elect to do it, due to the risks involved. The only changes to the rule that I have made is enforcing a Ld check and making the rule an order.

Whilst I agree that, in certain situations, doing this would be a no-brainer, those circumstances are in fact very rare. This rule would be unfair if guard had a resilient unit, possibly with a 2+ save, that could tie up their most dangerous foes in close combat whilst the rest of the army whittles them down. However, guard possess no such thing! Also, the rule would be broken if you could target enemy elites in close combat with little risk to your side, such as the participant on your side being a squad of guardsmen. I would like to remind you that, as a general principle, the enemy elites will not be fighting guardsmen, but rather attempting to assasinate command squads, and the rule itself stops you from firing in that circumstance.

If anything, this rule makes guard worse, as it will cause a foe to concerntrate on assisinating command squads, breaking up the morale chain, and screwing around with guard players minds.

Finally, I can guarantee that this rule is not unfair, as for a short period of time, one of my friends misinterpreted the FRF,SRF order, thinking that it meant all weapons in the ordered squad got an extra shot. This was powerful, but not unbeatable, and whilst you would think 'broken' it was not, in fact unstoppable.

My proposed rule pales in comparison to that, and is, as such, not broken or OP.

I can't actually find anything here I would disagree with.

The one caveat I would want to add, is that is the Guardsmen are outnumbered, it further hurts them. Though if the Guardsmen outnumber their opponent (just as likely, if not more likely), it helps the IG player more instead. But still, 5+ armor with T3 first? Not a very bright picture, overall.

Skinnattittar is right.

Awesome! Can I add you to my signature?

You have my blessing/permission. Go forth and pawn!