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.

@Desubot.
I agree that Epic (SM and EA,) are much better war games for M.41 !
if we could get the simplicity clarity and depth of Epic Armageddon into the 28mm 40k game I am sure many more 'gamers' would enjoy it!

Unfortunately most 40k players are a bit concerned about the major overhaul required to make 40k rules as good as E.A.

So we are left with porting some good ideas over .

The two main ones I would like to implement are 'a simple suppression mechanic' and awarding half victory points for units at under half starting strength for competitive play.

@TheSilo .
I would really like to de-clutter the 40k rules as much as possible.This means removing as much 'special snowflake' and ' randumb' rules as possible.I think we all agree on this!

How about this as an alternative to adding 1 to BS at under 12"?
'When shooting at target under 12" away , players can re roll any natural rolls of 1 to hit.'

This makes shooting at short range more effective , but does not mess with the basic BS score required to hit.(I hope you see what I mean to achieve?)

(Using limited re rolls, carefully , is a reasonable way to make minor buffs/nerfs IMO.)

I would simply say cover that makes units hard to see but would not stop incoming shots is classed as 'Light Cover.'(Long grass , dust clouds, chain link fence etc.)

And cover that offer substantial protection, like trenches , bunkers , rock outcrop, re-enforced walls etc are Heavy Cover.

I would not use the term natural, as man made and natural features and effects can offer Light or Heavy cover.

It is best to let players agree of what features give light or heavy cover before the game begins IMO.

To make the game straight forward I think it is important to get all units stat lines reading the same.
So if you can see the sense in having vehicle movement rates, then movement rates for other units make sense too.

I can not remember any one ever finding using movement/ speed values 'difficult' in any game that uses them.Do you have a problem with using range values , as they do the same job in game.(Defining range of interaction.)

Using 2nd ed as a guide/starting point.

Slow infantry (Slow and purposeful) ,3" does not halve movement when moving through difficult terrain or very difficult terrain.
(May not assault or double move through very difficult terrain as normal.)

Standard infantry 4"

Fast infantry 5" (Rounds up moving through difficult terrain to move 3".)

Standard vehicles , walkers , and ' fast creatures' like Nid 'Gaunts etc. 6"

Cavalry and fast vehicles , 8"

Bikes and very fast vehicles 12"

That is 6 clearly defined movement rates.(We can adjust the values for non vehicle units if needed.)And as vehicles move faster than infantry ,transports actually get their basic function back!

I do like the move and fire at half range option you proposed!

it has got me thinking on changing weapon definition.
Could we make it more about how weapons function in the unit, perhaps?

Pistols , can be used in assaults.(In revised assault rules to speed up resolution!)
Rapid fire, can move and shoot once up to half range.
Assault weapons can move and fire .

Remove the term heavy and ordnance, and replace with ...
Support weapons can move and fire at half range.
Fire support weapons , can NOT move and fire.

As a Heavy Bolter on a Chimera is a support weapon , but a fire support weapon in an IG infantry unit.

I shall stop there for now.
Ill talk more about more interactive game turn options later...
(Though I agree that alternating unit activation could be difficult to get to work well with 40ks unit imbalance.)

Just a quick note.
If we used the unit description to describe the movement rate/type.Then there would not be any need for additional data on the stat line, if players prefer it that way.

How would you feel about the 'unit type' being expanded a bit more to actually give useful player information?

EG if we included 'slow' or 'fast' in front of the basic description 'infantry ' to give the speed variants.

We could do the same for vehicles with the prefix 'fast' and 'very fast.'

We also could include the option to put movement type in front of the vehicle type .(In a similar way 'Jump infantry' is prefixed by 'Jump.)

So we can have 'walking' vehicle, 'tracked' vehicle , 'wheeled' vehicle , 'skimming' vehicle. to give movement types, so they can have different interaction with terrain types.

Eg wheeled vehicles count rubble as difficult terrain, and tracked vehicle count rubble as open ground.

EG if we used more generic classification, the in game unit mobility function could be described by it.

Are there any other special movement abilities for vehicles /infantry beyond amphibious, difficult terrain mod, and Jump jets?
(Not just faster or slower movement by other means.)