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.

Things like cover hopping, using faster units as decoys or distractions, stacking forces on one flank or another to force your opponents to move into a specific direction...

Tau ignore cover completely, I have no ability to field a faster army then I currently have (Bikes and trukkz with Deff Koptas), Stacking my forces just gives the Eldar/Tau/SM players a bigger target to hit with their apoc blasts and large blasts and multi small blast.

Any other useless suggestions? Sorry but the power creep is real and alive and only certain armies are benefiting from it.

A few things

It Is NOT bad to charge turn one, but a couple things about this.

When shooting a unit, your have you whole army that can shoot to kill said unit, if you are IG, Tau, Eldar, you can shoot with multi units to insure a fully killed unit.

In Melee even turn 1 it is never a 100% chance to kill the unit (Unless you break all army and have more than double the attacks of there wounds). If you get into melee you could be stuck there not killing a unit. And you dont have options like shooting does (to change targets or support with other units)

Not killing the unit is good and it is bad.
Pro's:
Cant be shot at
You kill on your opponents turn giving you another chance to charge

Con's:
The can get away with other units
They can counter melee
They can use it as a wall for cover/anti charge spot
They will shoot other more important units to kill.

Charging turn one is hard to deal with But it isnt without risk

Con's to charging turn 1
your army is split most the time
Shooting armies can blow a whole and move away
If you over kill they will shoot and kill you
If you over kill no cover
Counter charging is a thing *Cough Cough Knights?wraith night, Necrons cough cough*

I do however feel basic SM SHOULDN'T charge turn one, I feel thats meant for few and rare units, Each book having 1 or 2 units given the ability wouldnt be bad, but a formation that stops Overwatch and can charge with 20-40 marines is just stupid.

Honestly we need a rules that says you can charge turn one, First Strike or something, units like Mandrakes, Genestealers, etc.. will only get this rule.

A STR 6 ROF 4 gun on a fast relentless troop choice is too much for most assault armies, ignoring the rest of the Eldar list.

Martel732 wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Generally units you cannot do anything to even try to stop aren't particular fun.

Overwatch is a thing. It's a super thing with a D-scythe. On top of interceptor.

Now you see, if you are openly assaulting the thing with D-scythes you are doing it wrong. I don't see how poor tactical choices justify pushing for a situation that, as has already been explained is exponentially more powerful than its normal counterpart.

'But shooting is broken! Shooting is unfair! Why should I not be able to instant assault turn 1?"

Because assaulting is your tactical answer to these firepower armies. Just as shooting is their answer to your assault army. That means you will both end up moving about and trying to position to maximise your advantage against your opponent. You literally have to think, that is all.

Things like cover hopping, using faster units as decoys or distractions, stacking forces on one flank or another to force your opponents to move into a specific direction...

I mean, unless you want a barren table where everyone deploys 12 inches away and you can just literally push your models across, shouting WAAAAAAGH like some kid in GW on a Sunday morning beginners session.

There are far less tactics in 40K than you think there are. There are huge mathematical advantages at work with Tau/Eldar.

There also appears to be a lot less common sense in the playerbase too.

I mean, when you have the choice of assaulting the d3 autohit per D-scythe unit or any other unit..well, that's your problem if you can't figure out that being hit on a 6 is a much riskier option than being hit automatically. Or you could try to be clever and throw two units at them - one of chaff alongside your assault specialists. They only overwatch once and have to declare it per charge - if the chaff unit isn't shot at and gets in scott free it locks them down. Good on you grots/gaunts/cultists.

Dude I was being snarky about the D-scythes. Of course you don't assault them. Of course, being BA, I can't shoot them either because we don't get any effective guns. So I might as well pack up against them.

 rabidguineapig wrote:
It should not be a surprise that an opponent has the ability to charge turn 1 in any given game. Given that you SHOULD know that it's possible, you can null deploy using bubble wrap, castling, starting further toward your table edge, etc. depending on what the threat is.

Aside from the random SM powers the only unit I can think of that gets a consistent first turn charge is TWC in a deathpack because of the 12" plus run and charge with fleet. If you're worried about that either throw a screening unit out front that will get slaughtered, or move yourself back 6-12" and laugh when they get stranded in the middle of the board.

I don't think it's really a huge problem yet...

There are probably many instances where Harlequins could have most of their army in melee by the end of turn one if they were allowed to.

There also appears to be a lot less common sense in the playerbase too.

I mean, when you have the choice of assaulting the d3 autohit per D-scythe unit or any other unit..well, that's your problem if you can't figure out that being hit on a 6 is a much riskier option than being hit automatically. Or you could try to be clever and throw two units at them - one of chaff alongside your assault specialists. They only overwatch once and have to declare it per charge - if the chaff unit isn't shot at and gets in scott free it locks them down. Good on you grots/gaunts/cultists.

I play Orks, Orks are an assaulty army. Eldar are a psyker/shooting/fast army. So therefore for me to get into CC with one of their units I need to not only invest in an expensive boyz squad or Meganobz squad, I also need to invest in a 40pt (Minimum) grot unit that I need to footslot as fast as my assault unit who is probably in a trukk or battlewagon to preserve its strength.

So by that logic I need to spend 40-50pts MORE then the unit I am assaulting to guarantee I don't get my butt kicked...that is some crappy logic.

There's a few problems with the system that cause such an imbalance.

1) Shooting is currently too powerful on it's own.

2) Assault on turn 1 could be too powerful on it's own if implemented as a standard rule.

3) The I GO/ You GO turn based system is terrible now. There's no reason 40K should still be running this way. An entire army has to stand by while the other removes it from the board. A single unit activation at a time eliminates the possibility of a turn one win with shooting or assault. This also allows you to counter attack with another unit after the enemy unit has been activated. This would counter balance issues with turn 1 assault.

4) Assault should be permitted from all transports at all times even when moving, but If it isn't an assault transport then you suffer from a disordered charge and the enemy should be able to fire at +1 BS for overwatch. Assault transports could also allow you to re-roll charge distances. With the implementation of Overwatch, Intercepter, random charge ranges and casualties removed from the front, there is no reason Assault should suffer even more.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
There's a few problems with the system that cause such an imbalance.

1) Shooting is currently too powerful on it's own.

2) Assault on turn 1 could be too powerful on it's own if implemented as a standard rule.

3) The I GO/ You GO turn based system is terrible now. There's no reason 40K should still be running this way. An entire army has to stand by while the other removes it from the board. A single unit activation at a time eliminates the possibility of a turn one win with shooting or assault. This also allows you to counter attack with another unit after the enemy unit has been activated. This would counter balance issues with turn 1 assault.

4) Assault should be permitted from all transports at all times even when moving, but If it isn't an assault transport then you suffer from a disordered charge and the enemy should be able to fire at +1 BS for overwatch. Assault transports could also allow you to re-roll charge distances. With the implementation of Overwatch, Intercepter, random charge ranges and casualties removed from the front, there is no reason Assault should suffer even more.

I love your Number 4.

 Griddlelol wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Generally units you cannot do anything to even try to stop aren't particular fun.

How's that different from being able to shoot turn 1?

Because you can migitate effect of shooting somewhat.

But many of the turn 1 assaults have been ones you CANNOT really defend against. They come, they assault, they are locked in combat in your turn. Repeat until they either get unlucky enough they can be shot in your turn or you send your own CC units into the fold.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Griddlelol wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
Try adding more LoS-blocking terrain. If you set your board up to be a shooting gallery, you can't be surprised when it turns into one.

That's the same with T1 assaults too. It's rarely more than 1 unit that manages it. Even then it probably doesn't manage to charge an optimal unit for it to attack. Saw TWC manage a turn 1 assault on a small squad of Fire Warriors. The SW player was so happy, so was the Tau player when the TWC just chewed through the squad and had to endure a turn's worth of shooting from an entire gun line.

Thing about that is turn 1 assaults...Well MOVE. That means 24"+ movement by definition. Cannot make turn 1 assault if you CANNOT cover OVER 24" in a turn.. That clears past any LOS blocking terrain.

Not many shooting units can manouver 24"+ though...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rabidguineapig wrote:
It should not be a surprise that an opponent has the ability to charge turn 1 in any given game. Given that you SHOULD know that it's possible, you can null deploy using bubble wrap, castling, starting further toward your table edge, etc. depending on what the threat is.

Bubble wrap is nice. Does mean he will have unit from turn 1 though you cannot ever realistically shoot though. Imagine him having most of his army locked in combat before you get to shoot one time. Your only bet is then having good enough CC yourself or overwatch.

Also funny how everybody keeps saying "since eldar and tau are broken turn 1 assaults would be okay". Okay? What about those NON eldar and tau shooty armies? They would be hosed. Howabout rather than make it even more rock paper and scissor fix eldar and tau?

Turn one assaulting would be utterly brutal, especially to the weaker armies and the shooting based ones. Have you even considered how armies like the Imperial Guard will be affected by this - sure, you will be able to avoid the Tau gunline and you will be able to really hurt them but the effect it would have on other armies would be horrific.
Right now it is hard enough to play Guard. Introducing turn 1 assaults would utterly invalidate them and I might as well pack my gak up and sell it off if this ever happens.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Turn one assaulting would be utterly brutal, especially to the weaker armies and the shooting based ones. Have you even considered how armies like the Imperial Guard will be affected by this - sure, you will be able to avoid the Tau gunline and you will be able to really hurt them but the effect it would have on other armies would be horrific.
Right now it is hard enough to play Guard. Introducing turn 1 assaults would utterly invalidate them and I might as well pack my gak up and sell it off if this ever happens.

IG, shooty marines...

Fixing eldar and tau shouldn't be done by hosing every other shooting army by allowing assaulters be locked in combat before you get to even shoot once. Sorry but if you want to nerf shooting do it in a better way. Brrr at the days of rhino rush in 3rd ed. There's better ways to weaken shooting without going back to that time. Why every fix should be too far? It went too far to shooting so now too far back to CC except maybe against eldar and tau?

 master of ordinance wrote:
Turn one assaulting would be utterly brutal, especially to the weaker armies and the shooting based ones. Have you even considered how armies like the Imperial Guard will be affected by this - sure, you will be able to avoid the Tau gunline and you will be able to really hurt them but the effect it would have on other armies would be horrific.
Right now it is hard enough to play Guard. Introducing turn 1 assaults would utterly invalidate them and I might as well pack my gak up and sell it off if this ever happens.

Tau are better IG. It sucks, but as it stands, 90% of assault armies have no chance against Tau. And only half have a chance against IG. Most of my games against IG are only moderately better than fighting Tau. Because I'm not a premiere assault list. I just get shot to bloody chunks.

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Turn one assaulting would be utterly brutal, especially to the weaker armies and the shooting based ones. Have you even considered how armies like the Imperial Guard will be affected by this - sure, you will be able to avoid the Tau gunline and you will be able to really hurt them but the effect it would have on other armies would be horrific.
Right now it is hard enough to play Guard. Introducing turn 1 assaults would utterly invalidate them and I might as well pack my gak up and sell it off if this ever happens.

Tau are better IG. It sucks, but as it stands, 90% of assault armies have no chance against Tau. And only half have a chance against IG.

Soooo because Tau and Eldar are too good every other shooty army needs to be nerfed to death...

Yeah that makes sense! We couldn't imagine such a novel concept as fixing Eldar and Tau oh no! That would be too radical idea!

Turn 1 anything is bad design whether it's turn 1 assault or turn 1 shooty death. We need to reduce that rather than increase.

The Tau and Eldar aren't getting nerfed. People need to accept this. There is only one way to power to go: up. GW has decided this.

Even if BA could assault from DS against IG, it's still far from a foregone conclusion. Scatter, failed assaults, overwatch, bubblewrap units, etc. Remember vanguards could do this in 5th and they still sucked.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's a bit like starting a football match with the penalty shoot-off.

Manoeuvre is supposed to be part of the game.

An auto-win for assaulting without manoeuvring is hardly a very challenging type of game.

But Eldar and Tau auto-deleting units from across the board is somehow more skillful and involve more maneuvering?

Every army has shooting units. It's up to you to set up terrain to give areas of cover and manoeuvre cleverly to avoid their lanes of fire, then they will have to manoeuvre to get sight of a target.

But you now, 40K is a fairly gakky game nowadays, which is why I gave up playing it. 40K can't be expected to provide the level of challenge and balance you would get from say Squad Leader. That doesn't mean it will be improved by making it even shittier.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's a bit like starting a football match with the penalty shoot-off.

Manoeuvre is supposed to be part of the game.

An auto-win for assaulting without manoeuvring is hardly a very challenging type of game.

But Eldar and Tau auto-deleting units from across the board is somehow more skillful and involve more maneuvering?

Every army has shooting units. It's up to you to set up terrain to give areas of cover and manoeuvre cleverly to avoid their lanes of fire, then they will have to manoeuvre to get sight of a target.

So? All their shooting is mobile now. I'm struggling to find effective shooting units in CSM or BA.

Martel732 wrote:
The Tau and Eldar aren't getting nerfed. People need to accept this. There is only one way to power to go: up. GW has decided this.

Even if BA could assault from DS against IG, it's still far from a foregone conclusion. Scatter, failed assaults, overwatch, bubblewrap units, etc. Remember vanguards could do this in 5th and they still sucked.

Only thing sure in life is change.

You are assuming GW has some Tau/Eldar boost evil plan. In reality their boosts and nerfs are more of random and based more on what army happens to fancy current designer. Eventually designers change and with that armies designers are passionate about.

GW game design isn't competent enough to deliberately have some evil plan what armies to favour and what to dismiss.

tneva82 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The Tau and Eldar aren't getting nerfed. People need to accept this. There is only one way to power to go: up. GW has decided this.

Even if BA could assault from DS against IG, it's still far from a foregone conclusion. Scatter, failed assaults, overwatch, bubblewrap units, etc. Remember vanguards could do this in 5th and they still sucked.

Only thing sure in life is change.

You are assuming GW has some Tau/Eldar boost evil plan. In reality their boosts and nerfs are more of random and based more on what army happens to fancy current designer. Eventually designers change and with that armies designers are passionate about.

GW game design isn't competent enough to deliberately have some evil plan what armies to favour and what to dismiss.

They've been very consistent with Eldar over the last 20 years. Tau, less so, but it appears that Tau are now in the "in" crowd.

If Swooping Hawks, or maybe 1 premium Vanguard Veterans unit could do it, yeah, could be cool.

If a whole ASM army could do it, much less cool.

If a whole Tac-spam army could pull it off T1 (such as from pods), it'd be broken.

If WKS could do it... Well, I'm sure that one'll be in the new CWE codex coming out next week...

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Turn one assaulting would be utterly brutal, especially to the weaker armies and the shooting based ones. Have you even considered how armies like the Imperial Guard will be affected by this - sure, you will be able to avoid the Tau gunline and you will be able to really hurt them but the effect it would have on other armies would be horrific.
Right now it is hard enough to play Guard. Introducing turn 1 assaults would utterly invalidate them and I might as well pack my gak up and sell it off if this ever happens.

Tau are better IG. It sucks, but as it stands, 90% of assault armies have no chance against Tau. And only half have a chance against IG. Most of my games against IG are only moderately better than fighting Tau. Because I'm not a premiere assault list. I just get shot to bloody chunks.

Even Orks laugh at Guard, what assault armies are you on about?

SemperMortis wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
Try adding more LoS-blocking terrain. If you set your board up to be a shooting gallery, you can't be surprised when it turns into one.

This. I HATE THIS! I am sorry to be going off on you specifically EnTyme, but this is the LEAST useful comment to make in regards to the fact that certain armies can delete entire armies in 2 shooting phases.

I understand what LOS block terrain does, I understand how to position my units to minimize exposure, I know basic tactics.

The problem is that Eldar/Tau are the most mobile armies in the game, JSJ is a thing and they love to abuse it. Warp Spiders are a thing and GW and the fanboy who designed them had JSJ in mind, but on Crack.


Assault armies as a rule can not put out much in terms of return fire, so all the ranged combat person has to do is delete enough of the assault army so that by the time he gets close he is to weak to carry out the assault, usually 2-3 turns of shootings.

There's no question that Eldar and Tau are tough armies. But so are Necron, and Marines are pretty good too. But to EnTyme's point: if you set up enough LoS blocking terrain, shooty armies are severely gimped. If there is no shooting lane > 12", the maximum range of any weapon becomes 12". If there is no roadway > 3" you can't field models with bases or a footprint wider than 3". If all the free space is in the form of narrow alleyways instead of wide areas, jetbikes suddenly suck, and grunts with plasma pistols become remarkably useful. And so forth. Terrain constraints can be extremely effective in limiting what is fielded and how those units are played.

If the people you want to play with generally want to play in nice, open fields -- then some shooty armies will do really well with that. But that's no different than a medieval battle with an open field, where one side has significantly more archers and can just mow down the other side as they charge up a grassy hill. If one side has English longbows and mounted knights, and the other side is native American braves with tomahawks, whether the battle occurs in a dense forest or an open field will make a big difference, even though those units might, on paper, have some equivalency in "points".

 master of ordinance wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Turn one assaulting would be utterly brutal, especially to the weaker armies and the shooting based ones. Have you even considered how armies like the Imperial Guard will be affected by this - sure, you will be able to avoid the Tau gunline and you will be able to really hurt them but the effect it would have on other armies would be horrific.
Right now it is hard enough to play Guard. Introducing turn 1 assaults would utterly invalidate them and I might as well pack my gak up and sell it off if this ever happens.

Tau are better IG. It sucks, but as it stands, 90% of assault armies have no chance against Tau. And only half have a chance against IG. Most of my games against IG are only moderately better than fighting Tau. Because I'm not a premiere assault list. I just get shot to bloody chunks.

Even Orks laugh at Guard, what assault armies are you on about?

Maybe your guard, but Orks do NOT laugh at guard in general.

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Turn one assaulting would be utterly brutal, especially to the weaker armies and the shooting based ones. Have you even considered how armies like the Imperial Guard will be affected by this - sure, you will be able to avoid the Tau gunline and you will be able to really hurt them but the effect it would have on other armies would be horrific.
Right now it is hard enough to play Guard. Introducing turn 1 assaults would utterly invalidate them and I might as well pack my gak up and sell it off if this ever happens.

Tau are better IG. It sucks, but as it stands, 90% of assault armies have no chance against Tau. And only half have a chance against IG. Most of my games against IG are only moderately better than fighting Tau. Because I'm not a premiere assault list. I just get shot to bloody chunks.

Even Orks laugh at Guard, what assault armies are you on about?

Maybe your guard, but Orks do NOT laugh at guard in general.

Your damned right we don't. IG are one of the harder matchups for orks. SoB, IG and Tau are the worst armies for Orks to play against, Eldar are up there as well, but only because GW gave them about 3 times as much love as the next nearest codex.

As far as the other comment about LoS Block terrain and setting up all that. Most Tournaments I have been to limit terrain to a specific number. usually 3+D6 or some such nonsense. Very rarely do have the ability to grab giant buildings and place them in a way in which I can assault around/through them and he can't shoot me. Furthermore everyone seems to be forgetting one key thing, Difficult terrain! Instead of moving 6 and running D6 they are moving D6 and running D6, so you probably lost 2-3 inches of movement each turn. Plus if there is terrain when you assault that is -2 to charge distance. Ohh and god forbid if their is a grav field -4 to charge, better hope for some good rolls.

LoS and just terrain in general won't make an assault based army good overnight, the only decent assault army at the moment is KDK and that is because MC shenanigans and the fact that most of the army gets a 5++ minimum. Orks on the other hand? 6+ saves and open topped transports = lots and lots of dead units.

SemperMortis wrote:
As far as the other comment about LoS Block terrain and setting up all that. Most Tournaments I have been to limit terrain to a specific number. usually 3+D6 or some such nonsense. Very rarely do have the ability to grab giant buildings and place them in a way in which I can assault around/through them and he can't shoot me. Furthermore everyone seems to be forgetting one key thing, Difficult terrain! Instead of moving 6 and running D6 they are moving D6 and running D6, so you probably lost 2-3 inches of movement each turn. Plus if there is terrain when you assault that is -2 to charge distance. Ohh and god forbid if their is a grav field -4 to charge, better hope for some good rolls.

Yeah well no surprise if you play in enviroment that's geared from the get go toward shooty lists they get bonus from the get go. Tournaments play with ridiculously low terrain count. That's hardly problem with rules though. Imagine how crappy shooting armies would become in boards with proper terrain if stuff people are clamouring for would be implemented...Might just as well sell any shooting armies.

Tournaments should aim for more terrain to begin with. While not perfect solution it helps AND makes games visually more appealing to begin with!

And there's LOS blocking terrain that isn't difficult terrain either

Assault being weak is a good thing. Melee combat should be an occasional thing, done to finish off the last survivors of a unit that you've crippled and pinned down with shooting. If you bring a whole army of screaming idiots with swords then you should lose every time when the other side brings guns.

 Peregrine wrote:
Assault being weak is a good thing. Melee combat should be an occasional thing, done to finish off the last survivors of a unit that you've crippled and pinned down with shooting. If you bring a whole army of screaming idiots with swords then you should lose every time when the other side brings guns.

You're one of those people who hates melee aren't you?

 Peregrine wrote:
Assault being weak is a good thing. Melee combat should be an occasional thing, done to finish off the last survivors of a unit that you've crippled and pinned down with shooting. If you bring a whole army of screaming idiots with swords then you should lose every time when the other side brings guns.

Part of the appeal of grimdark is this goofiness:

And I'd like to keep it that way lol. Kharn would be much less attractive as a speck under a titans boot compared to soloing it with an axe to the face.

Roknar wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Assault being weak is a good thing. Melee combat should be an occasional thing, done to finish off the last survivors of a unit that you've crippled and pinned down with shooting. If you bring a whole army of screaming idiots with swords then you should lose every time when the other side brings guns.

Part of the appeal of grimdark is this goofiness:

And I'd like to keep it that way lol. Kharn would be much less attractive as a speck under a titans boot compared to soloing it with an axe to the face.

There's difference between assaults being viable and assaults being the king.

2nd ed had much more viable balance. Guns were main threat(hey even orks had viable shooting!) but provided you used missions and had real terrain even assaults had a role to play. When you need to drive entrenched enemy out of the objective throwing in assault troops(properly supported) can be hell of a more faster way than lobbing shells at them.

 Nevelon wrote:
Being assaulted locks you into CC. With shooting, the survivors of the barrage can move, shoot back, etc. But if you are assaulted, you basically don’t get to do anything but fight back. It takes the control away from the owner, and that’s not a whole lot of fun. Especially on turn one.

I think this argument is flawed. Yes that's how it works for 2 shooting units, the survivor shoots back. But what about shooting vs melee? The shooting unit shoots the melee unit, and the melee unit gets to do what exactly? Move closer and get shot at again until it's there. And when it's finally there, the shooting unit even gets to slap back (albeit with less force).

At least in melee the other unit gets a chance to hit you back.Sure, it might not be that much damage, but it's something.