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.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Overwatch was not a major issue for melee in 8th. There were so many ways to avoid, either directly, through soakers like repulsors, or through terrain manipulation.

The much bigger issue with melee in 8th was falling back. If the rumors that there will be a strat to allow you to fall back even when wrapped is a thing, that will do far more to undermine melee than the overwatch changes will do to boost it.

I agree with this- Fall Back is the bigger problem and I want to see how they resolve it. If Fall Back stays the same and a stratagem is added to allow units to ignore wrapping, then that will really suck- but if Fall Back becomes only a stratagem, and allows units to ignore wrapping, then I'd say that both solves the problem and removes the annoying mechanic of tri-pointing from the game.

 Grimgold wrote:
This and cut them down seem to be GW giving melee a soft landing after loosing three cornering.

Yep, this is what I'm afraid of. They're showing people a bunch of positive stuff first, only to deliver the hammer blow that wrapping is no longer a thing.

With overwatch gone, you are free to always try a 12" charge like in AoS. That is really a big boost to melee. There is still that rumor going around that if you multi charge you need to reach all targets, which makes a lot of sense with overwatch like this.

In general I like it.

Making Fall back a strat too would reign in the huge advantages of the flying keyword.

 catbarf wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
Overwatch was not a major issue for melee in 8th. There were so many ways to avoid, either directly, through soakers like repulsors, or through terrain manipulation.

The much bigger issue with melee in 8th was falling back. If the rumors that there will be a strat to allow you to fall back even when wrapped is a thing, that will do far more to undermine melee than the overwatch changes will do to boost it.

I agree with this- Fall Back is the bigger problem and I want to see how they resolve it. If Fall Back stays the same and a stratagem is added to allow units to ignore wrapping, then that will really suck- but if Fall Back becomes only a stratagem, and allows units to ignore wrapping, then I'd say that both solves the problem and removes the annoying mechanic of tri-pointing from the game.

That would result in a really weird play state where your main goal as a charger would be to charge two or more enemy units and keep them both alive (or more likely, charge one, keep it alive, and consolidate into the other), so that both of them can't fall back because of the limit of once per phase. This seems arguably as gimmicky or more gimmicky than wrapping. It would also result in really gimmicky ways of deploying units in long lines designed specifically to avoid two of your units being engaged. Games could come down to whether you can tag a single model of a second unit or not, not whether you can wrap a single model or not, and I'm not convinced that's any great improvement.


Though it would have the side benefit of nerfing castles and totally boning T'au, which I am all for.

Although fall back is a major issue, I will wait to see if they've adjusted it.

We've also not yet seen changes to the morale phase, which they've said they've changed. If morale becomes something to concern yourself with, maybe that charge will mean there's not much left of the unit that wants to fall back anyway.

Morale is something they've gotten wrong for basically the entirety of the game. I sincerely doubt it will end up mattering.

yukishiro1 wrote:
That would result in a really weird play state where your main goal as a charger would be to charge two or more melee enemy units and keep them both alive (or more likely, charge one, keep it alive, and consolidate into the other), so that both of them can't fall back because of the limit of once per phase. This seems arguably as gimmicky or more gimmicky than wrapping. It would also result in really gimmicky ways of deploying units in long lines designed specifically to avoid two of your units being engaged. Games could come down to whether you can tag a single model of a second unit or not, not whether you can wrap a single model or not, and I'm not convinced that's any great improvement.

We currently have the utterly bizarre play state where your main goal as a charger is to charge one unit, but get close enough that you can Pile In to as many other units as possible, and through Consolidation try to trap at least one model from each squad. Honestly, what you describe feels to me like an upgrade- at the very least, it provides a hard counter to aura-hugging murderball gunlines.

 Kommisar wrote:

 harlokin wrote:
I've only just bought a Vexator Mask!....Damn you GW!

that's not the reason you bring one it's just a bonus

indeed and now we can Vect it, not tactical or good use of CP but sometimes the tilt must flow

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Morale is something they've gotten wrong for basically the entirety of the game. I sincerely doubt it will end up mattering.

I hope not. People have a weird fetish for an unfun concept/mechanic.

Holy crap! GW just made a change that makes the Dakkadakka community happy!

Spoletta wrote:
With overwatch gone, you are free to always try a 12" charge like in AoS. That is really a big boost to melee. There is still that rumor going around that if you multi charge you need to reach all targets, which makes a lot of sense with overwatch like this.

In general I like it.

Making Fall back a strat too would reign in the huge advantages of the flying keyword.

Yeah, the apparent lack of a drawback to declaring long distance charges worries me a bit, and Overwatch was the mechanic to counter that. I'm interested to see how that plays out over time.

 harlokin wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Morale is something they've gotten wrong for basically the entirety of the game. I sincerely doubt it will end up mattering.

I hope not. People have a weird fetish for an unfun concept/mechanic.

Personally, not seeing why morale is unfun. A way to make a unit less effective without destroying it is extremely important in a wargame, or else you end up with a game that just nothing happens, or everything dies super fast (i.e. 8th ed).

-Guardsman- wrote:
Holy crap! GW just made a change that makes the Dakkadakka community happy!

The Aircraft rules went down reasonably well too, not too much "mark my words, we're all doomed" in that thread either.

I'm certainly happy about this change. Overwatch was one of those feels bad rules where there was little way to handle it that didn't outstrip the cost of the unit you were trying to charge. There still seems to be ways to improve overwatch (like the terrain example), so if people want to discourge a charge they have to be putting a unit that would do good in overwatch rather than just "try and get me behind my 6 layers of Guardsmen".

 catbarf wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
That would result in a really weird play state where your main goal as a charger would be to charge two or more melee enemy units and keep them both alive (or more likely, charge one, keep it alive, and consolidate into the other), so that both of them can't fall back because of the limit of once per phase. This seems arguably as gimmicky or more gimmicky than wrapping. It would also result in really gimmicky ways of deploying units in long lines designed specifically to avoid two of your units being engaged. Games could come down to whether you can tag a single model of a second unit or not, not whether you can wrap a single model or not, and I'm not convinced that's any great improvement.

We currently have the utterly bizarre play state where your main goal as a charger is to charge one unit, but get close enough that you can Pile In to as many other units as possible, and through Consolidation try to trap at least one model from each squad. Honestly, what you describe feels to me like an upgrade- at the very least, it provides a hard counter to aura-hugging murderball gunlines.

It does. That's exactly what Night Lords do with "We Have Come For You", although I generally try to slaughter the first unit before consolidating into another.

I agree, I never found Overwatch devastating, but it was really frustrating when you failed your charge (and didn't move a fething inch) and yet still had to eat free shots.

If they are going to get rid of wrapping, I hope they get rid of wrapping by simplifying the charge and consolidate rules, because they are so janky right now and filled with hidden complexity.

Also you guys want to hear a joke, to bad your going to anyway:

How is 9th ed like a piece of candy? To enjoy it you have to get rid of the wrapping.

 catbarf wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
That would result in a really weird play state where your main goal as a charger would be to charge two or more melee enemy units and keep them both alive (or more likely, charge one, keep it alive, and consolidate into the other), so that both of them can't fall back because of the limit of once per phase. This seems arguably as gimmicky or more gimmicky than wrapping. It would also result in really gimmicky ways of deploying units in long lines designed specifically to avoid two of your units being engaged. Games could come down to whether you can tag a single model of a second unit or not, not whether you can wrap a single model or not, and I'm not convinced that's any great improvement.

We currently have the utterly bizarre play state where your main goal as a charger is to charge one unit, but get close enough that you can Pile In to as many other units as possible, and through Consolidation try to trap at least one model from each squad. Honestly, what you describe feels to me like an upgrade- at the very least, it provides a hard counter to aura-hugging murderball gunlines.

I don't think it really is better conceptually. Not worse, but not better either.

The fundamental problem they have never come up with a solution for is that the way the game works, it is almost always better NOT to kill the unit you are engaged with in melee on your turn, in order to use it as a shield on their turn. This is the fundamental issue that causes all these problems. It should not be the case that your main objective playing a combat faction in 40k is NOT to wipe out your target with your charge.

What the game really needs is not a "cut them down" strat, but a rule that you can trigger at the end of your fight phase to make a unit that wiped an enemy unit that fight phase unable to be shot in your opponent's turn. You ought to be rewarded for wiping an enemy unit on the charge, not penalized for it.

Sterling191 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

T'au still get the linked overwatch. This makes the T'au Sept a lot less special so they might feel more inclined to move away from it.

There is zero point in playing Tau sept unless you want Shadownsun's double Kauyon now. Turning their sept ability into a once-per turn CP fuelled ability makes it instantly trash.

Unless some tau units get native ability. Or tau is going to be only army without native overwatch ability?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimgold wrote:
This and cut them down seem to be GW giving melee a soft landing after loosing three cornering.

They haven't lost it yet. And if 3 pointing goes away then that's way bigger nerf than this is buff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 harlokin wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Morale is something they've gotten wrong for basically the entirety of the game. I sincerely doubt it will end up mattering.

I hope not. People have a weird fetish for an unfun concept/mechanic.

Morale unfun? Guess being shot and hacked is unfun for you as well.

Morale is important part of warfare. Combats are won and lost due to morale. It's unfun that 40k just ignores it in effect.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

People keep mentioning "whatabout Centurions and Aggressors", but that's literally two units. Losing it about a rule because of two units PROBABLY means there's more going on to those two units. You know what would've helped? You can't reroll Overwatch shots. How elegant a solution.

Those are not the only units, but they exemplify the problem the best.

Big fan of the rule change.

Don't agree with those saying overwatch wasn't a problem for melee - its absolutist thinking. Yes, a lot of the time it wasn't. Then you had those games where your opponent was lucky and you were really unlucky, and you were left wanting to flip tables, as disproportionate numbers of troops died, or characters/monsters ate melta guns to the face.

And yes there were ways to get around this, bla bla bla - but often they were fiddly and still ultimately dice dependent.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

People keep mentioning "whatabout Centurions and Aggressors", but that's literally two units. Losing it about a rule because of two units PROBABLY means there's more going on to those two units. You know what would've helped? You can't reroll Overwatch shots. How elegant a solution.

Those are not the only units, but they exemplify the problem the best.

Well go ahead and name the problem units then because that's all.i hear about or even care about to be frank.

tneva82 wrote:
Morale is important part of warfare.

So is disease, can't wait for the unbridled fun of the 'dysentery phase'

Tyel wrote:
Big fan of the rule change.

Don't agree with those saying overwatch wasn't a problem for melee - its absolutist thinking. Yes, a lot of the time it wasn't. Then you had those games where your opponent was lucky and you were really unlucky, and you were left wanting to flip tables, as disproportionate numbers of troops died, or characters/monsters ate melta guns to the face.

And yes there were ways to get around this, bla bla bla - but often they were fiddly and still ultimately dice dependent.

Luck...If we look at luck we can say assault armies are screwed because sometimes tau firewarriors get lucky and wipe out your assault unit in melee. Or that shooting army is screwed because opponent gets lucky and passes every save.

Are we talking about luck and wishy washy or tactics?

 harlokin wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Morale is important part of warfare.

So is disease, can't wait for the unbridled fun of the 'dysentery phase'

The Death Guard would like a word.

Most overwatch suppression is/ not based on dice. It is actually one of the least dice-based parts of the game. It's mostly warlord traits, stratagems, and terrain manipulation. Psychic powers are the only part that is really dependent on dice to any significant degree.

The charge roll itself is about 20x as likely to screw a combat army as overwatch if you're talking about the impact of dice.

It's a good change, but it doesn't address melee's core issues.

Still, positive change is positive, even if it's not exactly what I want.

I play Tau, and I like this change, especially combined with the melee overwatch stratagem; the two should add some tactical strategy to the game and cut a bit down on time incessitantly fishing for 6's.

 JNAProductions wrote:
It's a good change, but it doesn't address melee's core issues.

Still, positive change is positive, even if it's not exactly what I want.

Agree, though I'd point out it's only good in a vaccuum. If it's combined with "and you can fall back even if you're wrapped, LOL" it isn't a good change at all for melee.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It's a good change, but it doesn't address melee's core issues.

Still, positive change is positive, even if it's not exactly what I want.

Agree, though I'd point out it's only good in a vaccuum. If it's combined with "and you can fall back even if you're wrapped, LOL" it isn't a good change at all for melee.

No, it's still a good change.

If your hypothetical change happens, it's a net loss for melee, but that doesn't mean this isn't good on its own-just that OVERALL, melee lost.