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 came up with a simple solution for balancing shooty armies against assault armies, while not totally breaking WH40k, at least in my opinion;

Repulse Assault;
If the defending/assaulted unit is able to see their opponent at the beginning of the assault phase, then they may take a free Shooting Phase before the assaulting unit moves in (for Night Fight purposes, range must still be considered). This only affects units engaging in an assault between the units directly involved (i.e.: Unit A is being assaulted by Unit Z in the same turn as Unit B is being assaulted by Unit Y. Unit A may attempt to repulse Z, but not Y, and Unit B may repulse Y but not Z. Unit C, although it may be in range or even within 2", may no join in the festivities. However, if Unit X assaults both A and B at the same time, both units may repulse X, however, one unit may only repulse one unit per turn. So say Unit V and W assault D, then D must choose whether to attempt to repulse V or W, not both).

You mean a charge reaction like that which has been proposed several times so far?

Okay?

Illeix wrote:Sweeping advances need to be fixed!...shouldn't sweeping only give free attacks and reinitiate the assault, rather than magically obliterating the enemy in defiance of logic and fairness?

Yes. Its the inane WHFB rule they shoved into 40k... At least in WHFB outnumbering ranks and flanks give bonuses to the "loss" total, but in 40k none of that tactical stuff matters...

It's half the WHFB system, the bad half.

Sweaping Advances aren't meant to represent one model killing an entire squad, they are meant to represent a unit beging so thoroughly beaten that they are scattered and cannot regroup, much like being unable to regroup when under half strength. This has been the way close combat has worked for centuries, if you are beaten badly enough to be routed then it is very unlikely that you will be able to come together in a unit again.

The problem is not that assault is too powerful, it is that some armies are not able to deal with it effectively. These armies include Necrons, Tau and IG. Note all of these have not yet had a recent codex update, so it shouldnt be a surprise that they are having trouble when the nature of the game has changed. Hopefully once they each get their updates they will be better suited to 5th than they are currently.

Skinnattittar wrote:I came up with a simple solution for balancing shooty armies against assault armies, while not totally breaking WH40k, at least in my opinion;

Repulse Assault;
If the defending/assaulted unit is able to see their opponent at the beginning of the assault phase, then they may take a free Shooting Phase before the assaulting unit moves in (for Night Fight purposes, range must still be considered). This only affects units engaging in an assault between the units directly involved (i.e.: Unit A is being assaulted by Unit Z in the same turn as Unit B is being assaulted by Unit Y. Unit A may attempt to repulse Z, but not Y, and Unit B may repulse Y but not Z. Unit C, although it may be in range or even within 2", may no join in the festivities. However, if Unit X assaults both A and B at the same time, both units may repulse X, however, one unit may only repulse one unit per turn. So say Unit V and W assault D, then D must choose whether to attempt to repulse V or W, not both).

Thats a great idea I think I might have to try that with my friends if they let me.

@ Regwon : I'm not sure which of your comments is most wrong, not individually, but on the whole. WH40k has been moving steadily towards assaults since 3rd Edition where it made it's biggest leap from 2nd, and IG recieved no improvement in their assault abilities in their 3rd Edition codex, so that doesn't really matter that they haven't recieved a codex update. Necrons are not supposed to be close-combat fools like Chaos, Tyranids, or Orks, neither are Tau (who are supposed to be worse than Guard in hand to hand), so it is no suprise that they do not handle it well, that's the armies, they are supposed to be that way.

Next, the problem with sweeping advance is that it doesn't properly represent a unit being routed, as examples have made before, if one Guardsmen, all on his lonesome, is able to inflict one wound on a squad of a million Space Marines (exagerated example) while taking no wounds himself, then the million Marines will try to flee in terror only to be either annihalated by this one unfortunate (or very lucky, depending on how you look at it) Guardsmen, or scattered. That is the problem, one wound and one failed Leadership test means a unit of no matter what size of no matter what ratio will be essentially destroyed for the purposes of the battle. That is what does not make sense. The offending unit should at least be of half the size as the other or a Monstrous Creature, or even an Independent Character (whom are very heroic and scary, perhaps). Just about anything that makes some sort of fix where one guy can't knock off a million other guys from sheer luck is better than the current system.

Skinnattittar wrote:@ Regwon : I'm not sure which of your comments is most wrong, not individually, but on the whole. WH40k has been moving steadily towards assaults since 3rd Edition where it made it's biggest leap from 2nd, and IG recieved no improvement in their assault abilities in their 3rd Edition codex, so that doesn't really matter that they haven't recieved a codex update. Necrons are not supposed to be close-combat fools like Chaos, Tyranids, or Orks, neither are Tau (who are supposed to be worse than Guard in hand to hand), so it is no suprise that they do not handle it well, that's the armies, they are supposed to be that way.

I didnt say that they are meant to be good in combat, i said that they have no way of dealing with combat. In previous editions IG, Tau and Necrons have had some means to deal with combat, whether that be by teleporting out of it, being highly mobile enough to move away, using sacrificial uints to draw combat away or (most likely) just having enough static shooting that it didnt matter. I thought this was the implication of what i said. I'll make sure to spell it out so that its more obvious to you in future.

Skinnattittar wrote:
Next, the problem with sweeping advance is that it doesn't properly represent a unit being routed, as examples have made before, if one Guardsmen, all on his lonesome, is able to inflict one wound on a squad of a million Space Marines (exagerated example) while taking no wounds himself, then the million Marines will try to flee in terror only to be either annihalated by this one unfortunate (or very lucky, depending on how you look at it) Guardsmen, or scattered. That is the problem, one wound and one failed Leadership test means a unit of no matter what size of no matter what ratio will be essentially destroyed for the purposes of the battle. That is what does not make sense. The offending unit should at least be of half the size as the other or a Monstrous Creature, or even an Independent Character (whom are very heroic and scary, perhaps). Just about anything that makes some sort of fix where one guy can't knock off a million other guys from sheer luck is better than the current system.

Exaggerated example dont really help anyone. Ok the first aspect of a sweeping advance is a lost combat. Obviously you didnt fare as well as your opponents so that puts you on the back foot already. Secondly comes a failed break test. This is to see if you can hold youre nerve. If you cant you get scared and bottle it. Finally there is an initiative test to see if you can escape without harm. If you fail that then some of the member of your squad may have been killed or captured. You each run off in different directions to try and get away as best you can. When you finally realise what has happened and get your self in order the remnants of your squad are all over the battlefield. The best you can do is try and make it back to your headquarters or sneak away quietly.

History is full of examples of people overcomming insurmountable odds and 40K (especially 5th) is meant to be a heroic and cinematic game. That lone guardsman that beat away 1M marines becomes the hero of [insert battle name here] and is likely to begin a long a career in the IG that will eventually lead him to become a heroic senior officer where he will be promptly eaten by a demon prince for his earlier arrogance. The game would be much more dul if this couldnt happen.

The problem is that it is too easy. It happens more often then not once the leadership test is failed. Though you do make a fun example of the outcome of this problem. As for the rest of your post, it is mostly sod.

Personally I think it is entirely resonable to see a unit broken and scattered if they are outmatched by a single opponent, i.e. "We couldn't even beat that Ork 10 to 1, game over man...game over"

Jack

Here is my vote for fixing sweeping advance: (assume assult has occured, all saves taken, ld test failed).

The assulting unit must itself is able to regroup (above half strenght) it can attempt a sweeping advance if not the unit consolidates and lets the opponent fall back.
If sweeping advance occurs the defeted unit takes 1 savable wound per modle running away.

My idea behind this is that if your assulting and can't regroup yourself you shouldn't be organized enought to run everyone down. IF you are able to run everyone down you deal 1 wound to each surviving modle, they take their saves and retreat (that way they can still regroup or they will keep running depending).

This in my mind would allow assult units that are strong to run down people, however if they have taken too many casualties a larger shooting group could break off (as there are not enought assulters to take them all down).

I probably will find a flaw/something left out in my idea but its a start at least.

See I still think that units getting assulted should be able to repell a group of guys/things running at them. I also agree with casper that if a unit is not organized enough to regroup its self then how can the be organized enough to take out their fow.

Quick add on They should not get rapid fire because they most likely would only have time to get off one good shot. or another fix to this would be to lower the repelling units bs by 1 because they are more worried about getting their cc wep out to defend themselves.

@ Emrab : a simpler solution would be to count them as moving, as the period of time may be too short to bring weapons to bear or fire off a bunch of shots, or they are also bracing for assault, ect... Stops HW from firing, which would be the greater worry. However, that's really what you want as your opponent closes in, just buckle down on that trigger, because they're so close it'll be hard to miss!

Maybe this could be a special rule for Guard?

I see your point that makes much more sense. I think that would be a great improvement to the guard as well as the Tau. However then shouldnt the units that made it though the hail of fire get some sort of plus? Since everyone would be just pulling the trigger they couldnt defend once the enemy was all up on them.
Also the more I think about it that means if you want to assult them you get assulted first but then again thats how it would be in real life guys running at another unit of guys trying to knock their heads off the guys shooting would just try and blast them to peices. Hope that makes some sense.

You would just need to fall into your hand-to-hand stance, really. Or you could pop grenades as they assault and be done with them, watch them get blown to bits as they try to run over your hand explosives. This also doesn't cover the fact that hitting on the charge is more difficult and easier to parry than defending yourself and striking from where you stand. So defenders, in cover or out, would have a distinct advantage during the initial phase of combat, and should get the +1 attack modifier if anyone, or +1 to their WS.

See thats what i never understood how can grenades not kill people.

They do, quite effectively too.

can you give me an example please. I know this doesnt help the op but i dont wanna start a new topic over a stupid question like this.

I'm not sure I know what you need an example of.

Ok Like I know how frags work in the game however they dont actually kill anyone. I also looked in the DH codex to find out about krak grenades but i didnt find anything. I also know that tau have these emp grenades but I think those work as frags im not really sure. I would have figured that if you toss our frags someone would die apparenly the would just slow the attacker down enough for you to attack them at the same time they attacked you.

Basically what they're saying (I guess) is that with the grenades going off and the general advances in armor, your opponent is just going to hold up a pace or two in the last few moments of their charge as they approach their opponents. I don't really agree with this either, I think grenades should be a one instant wounding attack per utilizing model, all save allowed. But I don't really object because how it is used currently it works, there isn't anything broken about the idea.

ok thanks

ok thanks

I probably will find a flaw/something left out in my idea but its a start at least.

Except of course against models with low saves. Jimmy the lone guardsmen who just killed 1 Guardian out of twenty now gets to run 2/3rds of them down because they have a bad armour save? (5+) Pretty much they don't really need to fix Sweeping advance as much as they need to fix the morale modifier rules for assault.

On the subject of sweeping advances why dont you just kind of keep it the same it is. Both players roll d6's and add there initative. Then the difference in total number is the amount of wounds caused on the fleeing unit.

example.

Tau vs Sm... tau player rolls a 4+2 = 6 and sm rolls a 4+4 = 8 and as a result of 8 - 6 the tau player gets away and takes an addition 2 wound(no saves allowed).

Edit: In the result of a tie, Tau get away, SM consolidate. In the result of a win for the Tau(no matter the difference in dice); the Tau get away and the SM do not get to consolidate as they are trying to figure out where the Tau went.

I totally agree that the range on Rapid Fire weapons should increase by 6" (ie 30" lasguns). I think this would go a long way to bridging the current gap in shooting vs assaulting.


As for Sweeping Advance, I think it is working rather well currently (and this is coming from a Guard player), the only thing I would change is make it so that a unit can only sweep *one* unit at a time. That is to say, if a unit of Nobz engages 3 units of guardsmen and wins the combat, it can sweep 1 unit of guards men while the other 2 flee.

Any body up for increasing ROF as opposed to range. Ya know Rapid Fire2.
Like palstics idea and boxants sweep only one unit at a time. Hows this for a sweeping rule?

Sweeping unit only destroys falling back unit if it outnumbers. If sweeping unit doesn't outnumber then the falling back unit takes an additional number of saveable wounds equal to the number of models in the sweeping unit.

Waddya think?

Btw, the new codices will improve if not totaly fix the situation. Feel free to argue otherwise but GW is a business and when they want to move the models for an army it'll get a really good codex.

Assault and shooting are just about as good as one another. No number of guns will be as threatening as a Land Raider or Nob Biker squad in your face however. The problem isn't assault but several races inability to deal with things like those mentioned above. The rules set is balanced with a few exceptions. Kill points for one but VPs were busted also so it's nothing new. Cover is a problem but not for shooting, you can still shoot the hell out of something if you have enough shots. The problem cover presents can be solved with terrain and by putting some guns up on the shelf(like the starcannon and the plasma gun).


A big part of the problem is the game has become 3 dimensional with TLOS but nobody has the terrain that is needed to make the gameplay more balanced. For example if there were tall hills for blocking LOS than you could shoot your lascannon at the Raider without it getting a cover save from the Rhino, or you could have units on the second and third floor of a building or two and the Nob Bikers would be sad that they didn't have anything else in their army to dislodge you. And more generically if you are shooting from up high at something behind a unit it probably doesn't get cover from a squad in front of it.


The "problem" is that only a handful of races do well in 5th edition and we don't have the right kind of terrain. As the various army books are updated hopefully that will alleviate their problems since the terrain problem will be solved in a few locations and almost certainly not at large events. It would be nice if IG and Necrons were redesigned to have competitive builds, and to a lesser extent Eldar, and Tau. Only Orks and the Chaos books are posting big results in competitive play but that may change. It took people awhile to get used to all the new options for Space Marines, maybe they will have some good lists. I doubt it though since they rely on Tactical squads for scoring and they are fairly inefficient.


I know I probably already sound like a dick for using quotation marks around the word problem. I will let you know why I did that. It's because no faction based game system will ever be balanced. If it is at some point balanced it will become unbalanced in the not too distant future. If you could make the rules just perfect inevitably a new army book would come out with units that performed above the curve or heavily abused some parts of the game system. If you want to do well in competitive play then instead of trying to change the rules(in vain) figure out what army you can build to do well in the metagame. If you aren't competitive than just have fun with your models. If that doesn't work you are probably an engineer and I am very sorry!

I posit that a lot of the seen inequalities in shooting and assault are psychological. I've played both extremes, and I can tell you when I played guard ( admittingly, this was in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, I haven't played them in 5th) it looked like the other guy started the game right in your face. With my Eldar, it seems like that table is a mile wide.