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.

They are no longer called guess weapons, they're called barrage. You don't guess a distance at all, you pick a model you want to shoot at, and then measure range, just like for any other shot. If it's out of range (or too close), it auto-misses, just like any other shot.

Pre-measuring is just going to involve different skills. The skill of estimating differences to a 1% degree of accuracy will be replaced with the tactical skill of knowing what to do with the information that you're not in range of something.

Slarg232 wrote:Guess Weapons are weapons you have to guess the range of before you shoot. A G 6-18 has a minimum range of 6" with a max of 18" and you have to guess in that range.

And if they already have gotten rid of G-Weapons, I appologize, as I still do not have the 5th edition.

'Guess' range weapons have not been around since 3rd edition, so evidently you still don't have 4th edition either.

Cheexsta wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:Guess Weapons are weapons you have to guess the range of before you shoot. A G 6-18 has a minimum range of 6" with a max of 18" and you have to guess in that range.

And if they already have gotten rid of G-Weapons, I appologize, as I still do not have the 5th edition.

'Guess' range weapons have not been around since 3rd edition, so evidently you still don't have 4th edition either.

Considering the Tau Codex has a Guess weapon......

You see my point

IIRC, the BRB says that "Guess" weapons now count as "Barrage" weapons. But I might be mistaken.

Monster Rain wrote:I think it's a nice crutch for bad players. I won't be doing it, even if it is legal.

Or you could say that a lack of pre-measuring is a nice cover for cheaters that either fudge their movement or play on tables they are intimately familiar with.

Plus, there is something to be said about not having games decided when your big charge falls short by .25".

Having played many variedgames that either allow or disallow pre mesuring far prefer the former due to:

Speed
Reduces manipulation of distance moved
people use workaround already - "when I fired my gun I was 11" away and no one has moved"
Getting rid of it in WFB is excellent - having played Dwarf players on tables made up of blocks of known dimensions - no guessing about it.

from a fluff point of view - Given the levels of technology it makes more sense.

Babylon 5 allows you to premeasure. Battlefleet Gothic does not. The games otherwise share a LOT of mechanics. I've never found B5 to suffer tactically from the ability to pre-measure; you still have to think several turns ahead, and plan for where your ships will encounter the enemy.

I'm a fan of pre-measuring because....

1) I'm good with estimating distances, I don't enjoy playing against someone's physical limitations.
    Some people just have poor depth perception or have a poor vantage point if they're stuck in a chair.
2) Budgers can't budge if you can check them.
3) Janthkin's example matches my experience as well.
4) The short charge does make a weak-sauce game ending.
    I don't want to win a game based on my opponent poorly estimating that fraction of an inch.
5) It allows for mechanics that target the closest model to take effect more smoothly.

Azezel wrote:Thay did get rid of guess range weapons.

I support this fully for exactly the stated reason - some people are just plain better at estimating range than others - a few people will never be able to do it accurately no matter how much they practice. C'est la Vie. I don't see why they should be excluded from the game.

I also don't see why someone granted superior spacial reasoning by a fluke of nature should have a concrete advantage in the game.

It's not a crutch for bad players - it's the elimination of a barrier that has no reason to exist.

A wargame ought to be a test of a player's tactical skill, puzzle-solving, understanding of probability, cunning - hell, even a test of his understanding of psychology and game theory. It oughtn't be a test of spacial reasoning.

yeah but maybe that's what YOU are good at. I happen to be able to judge distances well while you may have an advantage at number crunching. Who is to say what shouldn't be an aspect of the game? I believe they all should, your god given 'tactical' intelligence (play chess), my god given instinct (play poker), the other guy's god given wealth (play stock market)that gives him whatever advantage we can get. Why should this one be denied to us who are good at it? and you look down on us who can guess ranges precisely. We all, as human beings, have our pros and cons. Why does my precise measurement eyeballing capability deny me the advantage it gives me... while your Mathhammer number crunch is still allowed to make you superior?

They removed a strategy (fixed charge distances) and replaced it with a variable charge range but the ability for you to be able to make a Tactical decision whetehr or not to charge based in knowing the probabilities.

It adds a great deal of depth as you know have to consider the likelihoods involved, as opposed ot knowing with 100% certainty what will happen.

If they brought this into 40k they would likely add some kind of random assault move element

40K is actually rather unusual as a widely played wargame that prohibits pre-measuring.

Variable charge range is a feature in a number of rules. It has been controversial for the kinds of reasons people have mentioned here.

Some games have variable turn lengths and this has also been controversial.

However these things are a matter of perspective.

From this perspective, if an enemy regiment decides to charge you, they don't move for 5 minutes then run for one minute and stop 15 feet away if they don't reach contact. They simple move into contact unless your defensive fire stops them. The fight isn't over at the end of the turn, it's over when it's over.

40K effectively includes a random assault move by the use of the Run rule.

Guitardian wrote:yeah but maybe that's what YOU are good at. I happen to be able to judge distances well while you may have an advantage at number crunching. Who is to say what shouldn't be an aspect of the game? I believe they all should, your god given 'tactical' intelligence (play chess), my god given instinct (play poker), the other guy's god given wealth (play stock market)that gives him whatever advantage we can get. Why should this one be denied to us who are good at it? and you look down on us who can guess ranges precisely. We all, as human beings, have our pros and cons. Why does my precise measurement eyeballing capability deny me the advantage it gives me... while your Mathhammer number crunch is still allowed to make you superior?

Well - my spacial reasoning is pretty damn good (seriously, 100% when I took the RAF exam) - but you raise a fair point to which the answer is 'Calculator'.

If someone is bad at eyeballing, let him use a tape measure, if someone is bad at maths, let him use a claculator, if someone's poor, let him proxy (to an extent, at least). If someone's bad at list building, let him use Army Builder, or net lists.

If I beat you, I want to know it's because I am the better tactician (or just lucky on the dice) - not because you can't tell the difference between six inches and five-and-a-half.


You rightly say we all have our pros and cons but I believe (and I admit this is nothing other than personal prefference, there is no objective solution here) that the game should test some things, and not others.

Azezel wrote:If someone's bad at list building, let him use Army Builder

Hey I am not bad at list building, just lazy!

The ability to eyeball the tabletop in six inch steps is in my opinion irrelevant to wargaming or any kind of simulation of tactics.

It is a pretty easy rule to do an end-run around by using movement measurement and legal range measurement to semi-measure the distances you aren't allowed to measure -- this leads to further controversies about whether people are cheating if they do this.

I can't see the attraction of it or a reason to keep it.

Obviously some people like it -- if GW remove it from the rules you can still by agreement with your opponent decide to use it.

Well there's always space hulk, chess, battletech, axis and allies, sorry, and hundreds of avalon hill style hexgrid games. Part of 40k that makes it appealing is the slight uncertainties like distance, TLOS (how many people own a laser pointer since 5th came out?), model size, terrain placement. That's why it's a miniatures game, not a board game.
edit:
sorry for doubleclick there

Well, I guess we have to agree to disagree. I've always found games that allow pre-measuring (Flames of War, to a limited extent Warmachine/Hordes) to be more tactically interesting experiences, because I can focus on position and overall strategy (much like chess) rather than arguing over inch fractions.

Just eliminating the argument and cheating aspects in tournaments is worth the change, in my opinion.

I'm just afraid that they won't change anything assault-wise and mobile shooty armies will just stand directly outside of charge range.

You mean just like they try and do now?

Monster Rain wrote:I think it's a nice crutch for bad players. I won't be doing it, even if it is legal.

Oh please. Guessing ranges accurately isn't much of a skill - the only people who don't learn to do it well within a half-dozen games generally have a physical handicap effecting their depth perception. That's like saying a guy on crutches lacks skill because he can't run as fast as you.

The kids in the school gaming club I run pre-measure all the time in their 40k games, and other than losing the lamest special ability in the game from 2 units, it doesn't really change much about how the game works. There's a marginal increase in players who park less than an inch outside of an opponent's threat range, and a similarly marginal decrease in players who think that 6" is bigger than it actually is. Other than that, it really doesn't change the strategy of the game as much as people seem to think. It's a bigger deal in WFB, where maneuvering is more important, but anyone who's played War of the Rings or any of the countless other games that allow pre-measuring can tell you that those games are just as fun, tactical, and challenging.

Exactly.

Most miniature tabletop wargames allow pre-measuring and ignore TLoS in favour of some system of abstraction.

These are pretty much peculiarities of 40K and arguably cause more trouble than they are worth.

(OT: the LoS rules in 40K are a jumbled heap of nonsense IMO.)

Kilkrazy wrote:(OT: the LoS rules in 40K are a jumbled heap of nonsense IMO.)

So true...

So wait, your Battle Tank can shoot my Grey Knights through two forests and a big rock because you can see the outstretched foot of one of them? Fine, roll... a direct hit? Dammit, wounds and saving throws ... great, all dead, DAMN YOU, LEFT FOOT!!!

Azezel wrote:It's not a crutch for bad players ...

Yes it is.

kill dem stunties wrote:

Azezel wrote:It's not a crutch for bad players ...

Yes it is.

That depends on how you define a bad player.

Is being able to estimate 5 inches compared to 7 inches the key ability of a good player?

One might say that requiring an opponent not to measure distances is a crutch to those whose ability to Use Tactics is poor.

Pre-Measuring sounds like a decent enough idea. I generally give my opponents that odd 1/2" on a charge or weapon range anyway, and this would just make games run smoother.
Personally, I like TLOS. Solid things block bullets better than trees and leaves. The 3rd edition woods rules were insanely stupid in that regard.

I think pre-measuring would be a good thing just to in the fact that it prevents a type of cheating. I've seen people fudge movements all too often. Some of the seedier players will take any advantage of when you're not looking at the table. Lining out what can and cannot be done during my turn, allows me to relax and not have to watch my opponent like a hwak just to make sure he isn't cheating.

I thikn people are focusing only on 6" too much. What about tanks. Are my Heavy bolters out of range? Do I need to move forward 6" and not fire to make sure they are in range next turn?

Oh wait... I will measure and if I am in range I will just park and fire.

To me that is an important part of the game. Do i take a risk that I am in range or do I sac a turn of shooting to know I am in range next turn.

Also being .25" out of range arguement is not valid. You are out of range if you measure or if you don't measure. Premeasuring will still not prevent people from fudging movement.

To me that isn't an important tactical decision, and the annoyances from not pre-measuring (gaming it, up to cheating, etc.) make the rule not worth the hassle.

I take your point about being out of range whether you measure or not. It works both ways. Of course people do measure and fudge when moving normally or charging.

I think both systems have advantages and disadvantages. I do like the slight risk element involved in not 100% knowing the distances, but I also like not having to worry about it in games with premeasuring. It would be a neutral change, in my mind.

WM/H has an interesting variant where you can premeasure inside the control area of your leader (generally about 12-14"). This adds an extra dimension to the game, because if you want certainty you've gotta move your (vitally important) leader forward and expose them to risk.

It comes down to do you think the uncertainty of distance is an important element to the game or not. Personally I feel it is a good element to the game.

Personally I feel the game would be hurt more if they allowed premeasuring and went to random assault ranges. Too much of the game is dependant on luck and chance. Now making a key element of the game reliant on chance just to happen is too much.

I think pre-measuring at any time is completely fine. There are many reasons for this but, most importantly; I believe the game should be about tactics, strategy, list building, and army construction – not about one’s ability to see the world in 6 inch increments.

We’ve all had a game or two in our lives where the outcome of the game had less to do with the elements I mentioned and whether the uber CC unit was a fraction of an inch inside or outside its 6” assault range. That outcome has nothing to do with skill, and I think that’s a bad thing.

I have also observed situations where one squad was clearly within 24” of an opposing squad for Rapid Fire weapons but it was uncertain whether any models were within 12”. The shooting player was reluctant to measure 12” to his target, preferring to simply take one 24” shot with his squad, because it was advantageous to keep that information unknown to the opponent who would be moving 6” and assaulting 6” in his next turn. The opposing player insisted the shooting player measure 12” so he would know what to do in his next turn.

If pre-measuring were always possible, there’s added tactical flexibility in the above situation – the shooting player would know exactly how many shots he had AND judge whether it would be advantageous to take a run move backward to eliminate the possibility of being assaulted, simply waiting until next turn to bring the entire strength of his rapid firing squad to bear. The assaulting player could also know whether he would be in assault range and adjust his tactics appropriately. The focus shifts from ambiguity, to tactical/strategic play and I consider that a good thing.

Additionally, there are some scenario’s in which the entire game is based on whether you’re within 3” of an objective. Usually it isn’t an issue… but when a game’s outcome is decided on whether a player should run to guarantee the 3” distance to an objective or shoot to finish off that ONE remaining gaunt or Boy that could potentially contest it in the last round of the game, it’s not only anticlimactic, but completely dependent on a players ability to eye-ball distances instead of make objective decisions on sound information.