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.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Well yes it should come first but you should also get cover saves as well as armour saves. but if to many rules were added to make the game realistic like have certain amount of ammo and units could bleed to death or get thirsty which would make the game to complex and less fun.

Hi Cheapbuster.
It is possible to have far more detailed UNIT interactions using straightforward simulation type resolution using less complicated rules than 40k uses.
40k has the most overcomplicated rule set for the relativley simple game play .
(Most games only use 2 or 3 resolution methods , 40k uses 7!)

Detailed model interaction should be reserved for detailed skirmish games, so is irelevant to 40ks unit interaction,IMO.

Assuming everthing has to be overly complicated and abstract (40k) OR overdetailed resolution at the cost of smooth game play,(ASL) is a false dichotemy.

Using 'napoleonic regimental rules' for 'squad level modern war' is propably a bad idea.(And one the 40k game devs have been trying to reverse for at leat a decade AFAIK.)

TTFN