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.

The old target priority rule was that you had to shoot at the closest unit unless you made a leadership test. 4th edition rule, I believe.

The 4th edition Black Templar codex imparted a -1 penalty to their roll, as they are zealots that want to purge what's near them.

 ductvader wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
If anything, I feel target priority should be brought back; if you've got a Dreadnought bearing down on you, chances are you're going to fire your Lascannon at it instead of the Rhino across the table. This'd emulate the level of discipline (or madness) required to put the greater good (no Tau pun intended) over your own survival.

This would make the new bug dataslate DANGEROUS...in a good way.

I think the dataslates will prove dangerous. I don't have enough models yet to play my nids, but I see great potential in the deathleaper and stealer formations. Leaped will allow awesome mawloc shenanigans. And I see the stealer formations having potentially incredible potential for two uses. First, if you spread the units all over the table your enemy will have to many targets to deal with. They can't simply ignore your flyrants or fexes or whatever, so you should be able to use them for objective grabbing/contesting, linebreaker, or to mess up unprotected backfield. Simple target saturation will be key. Second, the units could be run cohesively, then only one unit takes overwatch while the rest slam into enemy lines unscathed.

I see great potential, and it's only the first slate.

Imnewherewheresthebathroom wrote:

 ductvader wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
If anything, I feel target priority should be brought back; if you've got a Dreadnought bearing down on you, chances are you're going to fire your Lascannon at it instead of the Rhino across the table. This'd emulate the level of discipline (or madness) required to put the greater good (no Tau pun intended) over your own survival.

This would make the new bug dataslate DANGEROUS...in a good way.

I think the dataslates will prove dangerous. I don't have enough models yet to play my nids, but I see great potential in the deathleaper and stealer formations. Leaped will allow awesome mawloc shenanigans. And I see the stealer formations having potentially incredible potential for two uses. First, if you spread the units all over the table your enemy will have to many targets to deal with. They can't simply ignore your flyrants or fexes or whatever, so you should be able to use them for objective grabbing/contesting, linebreaker, or to mess up unprotected backfield. Simple target saturation will be key. Second, the units could be run cohesively, then only one unit takes overwatch while the rest slam into enemy lines unscathed.

I see great potential, and it's only the first slate.

I'm already having great success with Death's Ninjas and the Hunting pack, eventually I'll play with manufactorum stealers as well.

The key to making them work (in most games) is infiltrating/outflanking/their unique placement.

Don't just infiltrate them unless you key your army to that, the terrain allows for utter safety, or you brought some fort shenanigans.

I've been having success with the slates, swarmy, and while I don't run mawlocs, I really want to for some turn 2 stealer/mawloc action.

but....way off topic.

Grim Dark wrote:
Random charge range rules do not "forge a narrative."

Random charge ranges are a holdover from horse & musket miniature games that simulate a horse's reluctance to charge home against a wall of pointy things.

An heroic SM or instinctive 'Nid, etc., would know in the 41st millennium whether or not they were in range to charge something, and are highly motivated to do so.

Its just more dice rolls in a game of dice rolls.

And if we must endure it, the unit should at least move the distance on the dice instead of just standing there holding their codpieces.

Cheers.

Now this makes perfect sense, and affirms my belief how dumb the rule is. Charging? oops rolled a 3 instead of the needed 8. Everyone gets to stand still. I hate it.

scottagain wrote:
Random charge OR casualties from the front would be fine. It is the combination of the two that hurts most.

Personally, I would prefer just casualties from the front. It fixes wound allocation shenanigans and lets anti infantry guns do their job better. Overwatch could still keep you out of charge range too.

And maybe that would finally shut up all the players saying my Tau are OP.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. It's the layers that are added that have really nerfed CC. I am also in full agreement that, even if you fail your charge, your unit should move, not stand there drooling on themselves, yelling "Hey, c'mon, shoot us again!!"

Random charge distances are worse than Hitler.

Even in WHFB they get to add their base movement value to the roll, so you know you are going to move AT LEAST 6" (4" move, plus minimum roll on 2D6) toward the enemy. If you are around 6" away from an opponent, you can be confident that you will succeed in your charge.

The problem is that 40K implements it in an entirely random way. You are beholden to the 2D6 (plus whatever special rule your unit may or may not have regarding charge distances) to determine how far you move, meaning that your unit could end up rolling a 2 and, effectively, staying still and not moving at all (because failed charges mean your units stand around playing with themselves while your opponent re-loads his guns).

I can tolerate removing casualties from the front. I did it back in 2nd Edition, so it isn't a totally alien concept to me.

But I absolutely cannot and will not accept that totally random charge distances are anything other than GWs attempt to sell me a gunline army.

The fantasy comparison doesn't really make sense. The charge move completely replaces their normal move, so of course they are different. 40k also moves their base movement + 2d6 in a charge, it just happens over 2 phases instead of one.

JPong wrote:
The fantasy comparison doesn't really make sense. The charge move completely replaces their normal move, so of course they are different. 40k also moves their base movement + 2d6 in a charge, it just happens over 2 phases instead of one.

I still hate it though

How many of you have actually done a full 20'-30' Charge in 80lbs of full armor. I have and the Current Radom Charge System is partially realistic.
>Overwatch: Is un realistic in the fact that it is actually easy to his some guy who is charging strait at you.
>Random Charge: Partially Simple things like divots and gopher holes force you change up you speed forcing you to sometimes pull up short, especially if you have to avoid those who have fallen in front of you from the Overwatch fire.
>Initiative System: Not bad, but they come something wrong, but yes Axes are slower than Lances/Maces/Swords.
The only change I would make is the Re-Rolls of 1's.
That and allowing Lances to participate in Over Watch.

Realism has very little to do with the rules of an abstracted wargame. Streamlined, balanced rules that represent an action sufficiently are what's required. Not random dice at every turn.

 Anpu42 wrote:
How many of you have actually done a full 20'-30' Charge in 80lbs of full armor. I have and the Current Radom Charge System is partially realistic.
>Overwatch: Is un realistic in the fact that it is actually easy to his some guy who is charging strait at you.
>Random Charge: Partially Simple things like divots and gopher holes force you change up you speed forcing you to sometimes pull up short, especially if you have to avoid those who have fallen in front of you from the Overwatch fire.
>Initiative System: Not bad, but they come something wrong, but yes Axes are slower than Lances/Maces/Swords.
The only change I would make is the Re-Rolls of 1's.
That and allowing Lances to participate in Over Watch.

I believe that the armor of assault-type units in the 40k universe are usually powered armor; and naturalistic types like 'Nids are biologically and anatomically designed to do what they do. It's not like metal encased knights riding at each other carrying great lumps of wood. (I think there is a Monty Python reference in there somewhere)

If heroic Space Marines can be brought low by divots and gopher holes than I'm afraid I'm playing the wrong game and have wasted a lot of my money.

G'day.

Random charge adds another element to the game, as an ork player I like my boyz in crumpin range. 5th ed I made sure to be 6" or less, this edition I will usually get as close as possible in order to ensure I make the charge. I have shot myself out of charge range with my war bikes (removing too many casualties in the shooting phase putting me too far away :p) But I wouldn’t go as far as saying it’s the worst rule in 6th. As mentioned before I like the Idea of taking Initiative +D6 or 2D6 or something. Overall it only adds more strategy to the game which is why I play the game anyway.

There is nothing 'realistic' about terminators charging 12" and genestealers charging 2". One soldier falling down isn't going to stop a whole unit of adrenaline-fueled killers determined to slaughter their enemies in mortal combat. "Hold up guys, Joe tripped."

I think random charges are stupid, but if you must use them I like the Initiative + D6" idea or allowing the distance moved. The current combination of rules is a classic example of GW rules writing at its finest:
1) perceive a problem
2) list possible nerfs to mitigate the problem
3) employ ALL nerfs to problem
4) perceive NEW problem created by going overboard with previous changes
5) repeat list starting with #2

Units are not charging their targets in isolation. They are making rapid movement through a dangerous environment. Even if they are relentless, genetically engineered monsters, they still require a minimal amount of self preservation and can be affected by environmental conditions and the random debris and effects of the battle that is supposed to be raging around them.

The random dice roll represents all kinds of things, from random explosions nearby to the unit having to traverse terrain that is actually harder to go over than initially anticipated.

Normal unit movement is noted as being a deliberately slow pace with troops taking cover and covering each other as they advance. The dice roll made for charge distance is not a "how fast are my guys today" roll but actually represents the likeihood of a unit being able to close into combat in an effective manner. They could even be likened to a kind of leadership test, given that running into a prepared enemy is an inherently risky and scary thing to do. Similarly the to-hit, to-wound and armour rolls do note represent individual shots fired or blows struck, but represent how likely one model is to incapacitate another.

GW has made the decision to make it harder to get into CC and has implemented a range of solutions to make this a reality. This could be the final bit of the pendulum swing away from when close combat armies totally dominated gunlines and the next edition will swing back toward CC again.

And yet shooters can sit contentedly in such dangerous environments, plinking away as it suits them, safe in the knowledge they have no concerns until some random enemy CC unit makes a random die roll, or someone shoots them back.

 Flinty wrote:
Even if they are relentless, genetically engineered monsters, they still require a minimal amount of self preservation.

Tyranids, Orks, and Daemons disagree.

 Anpu42 wrote:
How many of you have actually done a full 20'-30' Charge in 80lbs of full armor. I have and the Current Radom Charge System is partially realistic.

Have you done a full 20' charge wearing powered armour as a genetically modified soldier? Have you ever been a 7 foot tall, 300 lb green ball of muscle and done a full 20' charge? Have you ever been an alien from a distant galaxy bred solely for the purpose of charging at your enemies swinging you arms, which are giant scythes by the way, and done a full 20' charge? Have you ever been the most amazingly well trained soldier in the world today (ie. your average run of the mill guardsman) and done a full 20' charge at someone?

Yeah I didn't think so Arguing realism is a bit pointless, but even if we are arguing realism, I can't picture a trained soldier looking down the field of battle and thinking "hrm, I can make that charge... oh wait, no I can't, best stand here and get shot again so I can waddle a bit closer and THEN make the charge". At most I could see someone panicking and not charging against a more fearsome foe... but that's why we have "causes fear" rules.

I think charging with init+a d6 is utterly broken that would give a flying hive tyrant a possible threat range of 28''. You can easily get him to init 10. and CSM deamon princes a 26'' threat.

Sargow wrote:
I think charging with init+a d6 is utterly broken that would give a flying hive tyrant a possible threat range of 28''. You can easily get him to init 10. and CSM deamon princes a 26'' threat.

We wouldn't combat to be viable for some units now would we?

Sargow wrote:
I think charging with init+a d6 is utterly broken that would give a flying hive tyrant a possible threat range of 28''. You can easily get him to init 10. and CSM deamon princes a 26'' threat.

Yeah, Init isn't a great measure. It would be great if we had another stat called "movement" that defined how fast something can "move".

Why GW got rid of the movement stat I will never understand. At first thought you might think it's simpler to eliminate a stat... then you think for 1.34 seconds and realise giving everyone the same movement distance simply means you have to have a bunch of exceptions to the rule for units that are faster/slower and the rules just get more convoluted and make even less sense.

I really think 40k need to have a rules overhaul. Throw all the old codices in the bin and start fresh. They did it 2nd ->3rd, they did it 5th->6th Fantasy, they can do it again. The won't, but they could, and really I think they should.
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crablezworth wrote:

Sargow wrote:
I think charging with init+a d6 is utterly broken that would give a flying hive tyrant a possible threat range of 28''. You can easily get him to init 10. and CSM deamon princes a 26'' threat.

We wouldn't combat to be viable for some units now would we?

We just don't want it to be silly. Initiative isn't a great measure of how fast someone can cover distance.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
We just don't want it to be silly. Initiative isn't a great measure of how fast someone can cover distance.

But high initiative does tend to coincide with fleet a lot doesn't it?

I like it

It is quite fun in a casual game, as it can generate some really memorable and fun moments, but in all honesty I preferred it as it was before. Imagine having to roll to see if your gun works, or to check your range. It would suck right? I understand the aim is to add realism but it really does the exact opposite. Assault marines not managing a charge against some guardsmen 3" isn't realistic, its stupid. There are already mechanics in place to respresent the difficulty of charging (such as the rules for charging through difficult/ dangerous terrain). Overwatch is fine, but when combined with 2D6" assault range it makes assault almost suicide for all but the stringest assaulters. I understand that some might say that that's how it really should be, and that it was silly how close combat is doing half the killing in a sci-fi setting, but the fact is its a galaxy where close combat is ingrained into the setting, making it more science-fantasy thatn fiction.

I agree; I think that is pretty stupid and seems to force randomness for the sake of randomness. I get that it was meant to curb the assault spam of pre-6th edition, but rolling to see if you can charge seems to take choice away from the player. Maybe it should have been something along with Snap Shot, for instance if you suffer a wound via Snap Shot it can stop your charge (and make snap shot not a 6)? That would at least make sense as you could imagine a squad breaking out of a charge under a hail of fire.

 EVIL INC wrote:
It actually adds realism to the game. How many units have the clumsy guy who trips while carrying full kit or in an urban setting hafta run through piles of trash or cans or in rural settings run through high weeds and slippery mud. likewise the guy who is just a maniac who is in better shape than anyone else who is able to run farther faster.

It also forces players to pay closer attention to the game and not be so lazy in their movement which in turn, causes them to pay closer attention to the rest of the game.
Almost all assaults would actually be initiated from an average of 3-4 inches. In past editions, players would just push a model within the unit to within 6 inches and call it close enough because they were guaranteed a successful charge. Now that there is an off chance they may not make it, they complain that they have to actually measure and move their models which takes a few more seconds of their time.

Likewise, it assists assaulty armies like orks and bugs because it gives them the chance to make assaults they might not otherwise have been able to make before.

Since overwatch is a joke (except for flamer template weapons if you have masses of them in the unit) so is not really an issue (negating tau as we ALL agree they are broken).

Whoa whoa whoa realism? Please hold on and remember what we are playing . Also if we are going serious on this, then let's do this. Daemons? They aren't going to trip when charging you. Orks? don't care if somebody trips they'll just trample that ork. SM? Yeah that'd be a blast to see a SM trip SoB, same story. Nids? Trample over that model. Also the thing is is that you state it as though some guys can run faster than others. No, its just random. Pink Horrors, guardsman, and marines are just as likely of charging 12" as 2". If we want this realism, we should add limited ammo, gun jams, reloading, exploding guns, plasma that explodes on a roll of a 1 that you then roll another 1 that causes a small blast to be placed on your model and wound all around it, etc.

And it doesn't help one pay closer attention. It just makes an assaulter more paranoid about getting even closer to the enemy before charging. Also if I'm charging why would I stop .5 inches from my enemy? Why would I then flee back to where I stood. And this edition most people just push their models to about 3-4 inches before declaring a charge. At best people will try about an 8 inch charge with fleet (for the most part). But you don't want to risk it, you'd rather run often times giving the enemy another turn to blast you off. Also this doesn't solve the fact that now shooting is just gunline it up, stand there and shoot. You don't move much, you just kinda castle up and wait and shoot and wait and shoot. Also, then I'd like to see smoke on the field so the enemy can't see me and their gun range is RANDOM.

I do however agree that overwatch (bar Tau and flamers (although I actually kinda like the flamer overwatch. It gives them a use for once) isn't that bad. I do find it silly that orks have the best overwatch in the game but a SM, Eldar's, etc has some of the worst overwatch ever and an assault unit with no guns gets charged with no "overwatch" like not even on a 6 countercharge or something. Overwatch is silly and pointless, it adds little to it and the only thing is it makes assault armies fear that one model dying and making them lose the charge. Most games though (besides tau and to some extent against heavy numbers of flamers) it will mean almost nothing. I still say it really shouldn't exist considering the game is played as though everything is happening at seconds. So if you are shooting at a unit and ambushes charge you from behind, or the sides, or a different angle bam no response time. Actually that reminds me, if this were so shooters should only be able to shoot the way they are facing not in any other direction. The problem with assault is it is dozens of punctures from the new edition. Not a single oneof them by themself would truly ruin it. Random charges? Alright I guess... Losing units from the front? Alright I guess... The problem comes down to when all of these things occur at once. Also the losing units from the front is naff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 phatonic wrote:

pejota wrote:
Clumsy Imperial Guard? Sure.

Clumsy Space Marine? I thought that was genetically engineered out of them...

Say it another way, the overwatch simply pinned you down and had to take tactical cover.

except when the tactical cover means in the middle of nowhere doing nothing right outside of cover to add

I have had a 3" Charge fail and then next turn the Ork player made a 11" Charge. The combo of the two cost me the game, but the momentary exitement was worth it.

 ductvader wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
We just don't want it to be silly. Initiative isn't a great measure of how fast someone can cover distance.

But high initiative does tend to coincide with fleet a lot doesn't it?

It does to an extent I guess, being that models who are quick on their feet also tend to be fast reacting. But then there's models that are very low Ini because they are slow to react but I think would be able to cover distances quite well (a Carnifex is only Ini2 and can be given Adrenal Glands which give it fleet but it stays Ini2). I don't imagine Ogryns would be particularly slow at covering ground but are Ini2.

 EVIL INC wrote:
Most assaults are initiated from 3-4 inches unless you are super lazy and dont move your models far enough. so unless you are SUPER unlucky (think the guy tripping oer his own shoelaces), your GONNA make it.

You keep saying that like it's a) true and b) relevant.

Most assaults are not initiated at 3-4 inches. In fact I don't think I've had a less than 6" assault in the past 2 months (wait - that's not true. My Flyrant had a 1.5" assault against the Vindicator he immobilized the turn before).

It comes down to
first off skill,

Skill at rolling higher?

then not being too lazy to move your models. If you just push them to within 6 inches instead of actually measuring and moving them to within 1 inch, there is the odd chance you roll snakeeyes. If you had moved your full distance, you would made it even on snake eyes.

I've literally never seen someone do this. Ever. Even in 5th.

I can see the models moving the distance rolled if they failed their charge, it would actually make sense.. Of course, they would be pinned (even fearless units) otherwise, you would have units declaring assaults from 40 inches away to abuse that extra free move.

No - the rules still say you have to be in charge range to declare a charge.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 ductvader wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
We just don't want it to be silly. Initiative isn't a great measure of how fast someone can cover distance.

But high initiative does tend to coincide with fleet a lot doesn't it?

It does to an extent I guess, being that models who are quick on their feet also tend to be fast reacting. But then there's models that are very low Ini because they are slow to react but I think would be able to cover distances quite well (a Carnifex is only Ini2 and can be given Adrenal Glands which give it fleet but it stays Ini2).

...and orks on the waagh.

There could be a way around it though if we/GW think instead of just rebooting an old system.

I love the new rule - simply because the odds are BETTER (than in 5th ed) if you are assaulting into terrain/cover; which most of the time - I am.

I also like how this rule works with fleet... yeah occasionally you come up short - but in 5th edition you couldn't measure, so unless it was very obvious - you sometimes came up short too.