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.

Nova nick wrote:Ya, I know there are other even more random things but I was just focusing on this one. Again, I haven't played a 6th edition game yet and I just wanted to know how you guys thought his would play.

Generally, I can see its met with a lot of opposition so I guess it's probably best to leave it as is. I just like it being more stratigic and less luck, but we can't all have our way..

So you haven't even played a game of it, and are not even trying something and you want to change a rule?

I can't 8| harder at this.

it would work fine, but I dont think its needed as the average is around 6 anyways.

Vladsimpaler wrote:You do realize that this would buff shooting armies even more, since now everyone can premeasure.

Brb just staying 13" away from your assaulting units so you never get into combat, you mad?

That is the reason why premeasuring is allowed now a days as the game is much more randomized, and instead allows players to make informed decisions with some risk involved, otherwise premeasuring would be incredibly overpowered..

Assaults are not just melee - they are close ranged fire fights, grenades, intimidation and sheer determination as well as tactics and hand to hand. This is why it is 2d6. You might realise you cannot break the enemy, something unexpected like their overwatch might force you back... in real wars such things are not as clear cut... if they were it wouldn't be war!

As an answer for the original question, well no. My reason is that since fleet and power swords ect got nerfed, units like Howling Banshees need to be able to assault from longer distances and also with power swords getting nerfed, Terminators are epicly OP and should be put up in points cost.

The problem is not that luck influence on the game: is that averything seens to be luck, and more everytime...

What is the point of planing your moves and tactics if in the end of the game everything will be decided by rolling dices? So, lets get out the expensive miniatures stuff, and just play a game of chance...

But im happy to say that rolling charge range dont made the game harder for chargers. Specialized chargers normally can reroll one of the dices, and move fast enough to be at 6-8 inchs from the enemy at charge time. In reality, shooting is not better than assaulting now, it is just more balanced with assault (something it was not on the 5th).

Well, fleet now make a big diference.

The ramdominess i dont like in those new rules are those you can not predict at all (running... it could be a lot better with 1d3+2, instead of 1d6, and rules like fleet could add +1 or 2 to it... You get variance, but you still can count on something, see.

Or those things who should be tactical options all the time: psychic powers and warlord traits. Those should be traits of the characters, not just some ramdom buff :/

But i see how those will end up funny, creating situations nice and funny situations on the game, or just helping to keep "that game" remarcable.

"do you remember when i rolled "+1 inch on charges" on that game with my IG, how i winned about it when the 6 comes on, and how i ended using it on a last move desperate move who gave me the game?"

I find it interesting that allot the pro 1d6'ers, say the average is 7", so its actually better/ doesn't matter. An average of 7" is not better then a guaranteed 6". This combined with overwatch ends up hurting assulty armies.

That being said...I don't love the random charge length, but I don't think it is game breaking. All it really does is change the way you play. For instance my orks assault allot less and shot allot more. It also does not mean that suddenly skill does not matter.

Also for the record I am irritated by the warlord traits and the mysterious forests/objectives. I feel like they add unneeded complexity and randomness to the game without adding anything interesting or very significant tactically speaking.

xStuuy wrote:That is the reason why premeasuring is allowed now a days as the game is much more randomized, and instead allows players to make informed decisions with some risk involved, otherwise premeasuring would be incredibly overpowered..

This is a good point, going back to the OP if you were to make a standard 6" assault range, then you'd have to do something about premeasuring too, otherwise assault armies would have more chance.

Heres a GRAND idea.

Stop complaining and go play 5th edition.

Personally I say just try it and see how you go. You can usually tell after a game or two if a house rule works or not and if it needs modifications to make it work.

I also am not a huge fan of random movement. Much of the game needs dice rolls to keep things interesting, if there were no dice rolls the game would be boring because you could know the result of a round of shooting or a combat before it happened. Movement, on the other hand, I think has no benefit to being random and is only a source of annoyance and frustration.

I also like to reduce the luck aspect of the game. A certain luck aspect is important, as it then makes the game about improving your odds and accounting for times when things don't go your way. But random movement I personally find just annoys me. Even in 5th edition one of the very few games I played a couple of bad fleet of foot rolls on Tyranid units that you normally expect to be bounding across the battlefield cost me the game, and not in the fun way like when an Ork randomly explodes and takes out half your army and you have a hearty laugh imagining the moronic greenskin pointing the fun the wrong way or the Mek forgetting to tighten a bolt. In a frustrating "ok, I moved them out of cover, now they need to roll anything but snake-eyes and I'm good... damn" where you then watch the unit get blown away

I think it's worth a try.

I dislike the random movement too, and no, premesuring + determined charge will not break the game because :
- Overwatch can still make you fail your charge
- Shooting don't have random range, and premesuring should break shooting in that case.

I agree with The Dwarf Wolf on this point : Luck should be here, but not for everything.

Especially in 40K, less luck don't mean no luck. A lot of game have a lot less luck involved, and are still good games, and probably more tactical ones.

So go for it, but I'd go as far as : change fleet to make it like a good old difficult terrain test. (Yeah, keep random roll, but not completely random).

There are ways to make 6th edition less random. Several armies have old psychers which pick powers, are largely fleet, and have other rules which makes the impact of a few more dice rolls less harmful.

Playing Dark Eldar, for example, and prioritizing getting fearless on the important assault unit gives you decidedly less randomness than 5th edition.

Remember the randomness that was decreased:
* Nightfighting is no longer random sight distance.
* Fleet special rule decreases randomness in movement.
* Dangerous Terrain is no longer 1 in 6 risk of losing a model (closer to 1 in 18, depending on army)
* Fearless is reliable and very potent

I've found that random assault distance now puts a risk-reward perspective on it as well. Do I risk assaulting from 9" off? Sure, I'll see what I get (and of course they don't make it and get assaulted by two groups of Tyranids next turn and die).
My only grief is that you don't move models if the assault is failed, although it could be abused to move models more than is reasonable.

You could just not assault. Honestly, the minimum randomization would require an shooty army that does not deep strike or have reserves.

Can we just have a rock-paper-scissors game like Vampire LARP? Wait, that's almost luck, too...