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.

Deuce11 wrote:What I am trying to convey is, the turn sequence system of 40k is inequitable in its treatment of how many actions take part in similar time frames. Heavy weapons are too greatly disadvantaged by having to be stationary the turn they fire. This problem is compounded by the fact that the rest of the unit's members are also encumbered by the limitations provided by a Heavy demarcation on a single weapon in their unit.

The rest of the unit's members generally have rapid fire weapons, and so also benefit from standing still unless the enemy is right up close.


Removing the requirement to track which members of the unit have moved isn't so much 'dumbing down' the game as shifting the focus from individual models to units. Which was a necessary change to move the game from a skirmish game into a small army level game. 2nd edition allowed for the sort of detail you want... and was quite unwieldy for large games.


I'm not against the idea of allowing heavy weapons to move and fire, but it needs to be balanced out. Requiring a 6 to hit only works for weapons that roll to hit. And allowing everyone to move and fire somewhat impacts against units that currently have this ability specifically as an advantage over other units.

insaniak wrote: And allowing everyone to move and fire somewhat impacts against units that currently have this ability specifically as an advantage over other units.

Only a little bit. Those that have relentless would still be able to move and use the heavy weapons at maximum efficacy. Those without relentless would only hit on 6's.

As for blast weapons there were two proposed solutions: 1) always scatter the direction indicated on the scatter dice (even 'HITS' have an arrow) reduced by BS as normal; or 2) never reduce the scatter but a HIT still lands perfectly. I think I like option number one.

Defeats the point of having a target on the dice...

I like the new rules for it though.

It also gives them an opportunity for rules like "BS does not lower it" in this case, rather than having to make the amount scattered bigger by a dice or two, which could effect it too much.

I have a question for all you boys and girls - how would this rule dramatically change ork firing?

the_ferrett wrote:I have a question for all you boys and girls - how would this rule dramatically change ork firing?

It doesn't because most of ork's stronger weapons are assault. Therefore they are not penalized by moving and firing.

Are you implying that since this rule will buff most other armies it is unfair for orks? I don't think it will make enough difference to really change things and, thusly, the orks would not be overly disadvantaged.

Or you could just work out the points for 'Relentless' and add that to the unit cost. Or if you want another type of penalty go with 'Slow and Purposful', which gives 'Relentless' but makes all movement difficult terrain.

helgrenze wrote:Or you could just work out the points for 'Relentless' and add that to the unit cost. Or if you want another type of penalty go with 'Slow and Purposful', which gives 'Relentless' but makes all movement difficult terrain.

Just adding the points for relentless to every heavy... I was immediately averse to this idea but it is really simple and logical. Definitely another potential option. Is that too much of a buff though? I guess it would depend on the points...