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.

I am getting into guard and play at a very friendly club, full of house rules and allowances that make sense. One of my friends also plays guard and has a slew of conscripts. One of the rules he uses for his army is a modified "life is cheap", allowing him to fire into combat that conscripts and infantry squads are engaged in. We allow it because we figure that it is well within the universe; in the current IG codex, the master of ordnance selection says that the attempts of company commanders to call in artillery can result in friendly casualties. It also touts that commanders feel that manpower is the only thing they have in unlimited supply and ammunition is worth more than life.

I propose that infantry squads and conscripts engaged in close combat can be fired upon by friendly forces. Veterans, storm troopers, and elites like ogryns are too valuable and experienced to risk. What say you?

-cgmckenzie

I'd allow it with the caveat that doing so causes all squads of the same type with LOS to the target to take a morale check when you do so.

I think what would be better is either

a) it is an order that is given only the company commander can give.

b) like Hadouken a moral check is needed

As an order, it makes more sense. I forgot to put penal legions in there, cause who cares about their lives anyway?

-cgmckenzie

I like the rule and defently allow it as an order but you need some detail on the rule. say, every 1 that is rolled in shooting hits a friendly?

we acctually have a rule at our table that makes this interesting

units don't confer cover
however when firing through a unit(friendly or enemy) a 4+ check is made for each shot
on 3- the front unit takes the blow

This opens up the game in ways you can imagine.
units can no longer glob up and stack fire
my IG freind needs to spread all his heavy weapons teams out all across the board
meanwhile my tau can glob up and keep a solid formation as most my firepower is made of large models that overshoot infantry

I like the idea of hitting your allies on a 1 to hit.

We like 50 50 cause its hard to imagine firing into a unit and only hitting 16% but being 50% accurate at the unit behind

docbrown wrote:We like 50 50 cause its hard to imagine firing into a unit and only hitting 16% but being 50% accurate at the unit behind

Why is that so hard to believe? Have you ever seen the way real military forces move and fire in a combat zone? One squad advances and hits deck, while they advance the other unit gives them cover fire. I'd be willing to bet that far less that 16% of the time does anybody in the squad running get hit by the squad giving cover fire. Now when firing through enemy models to reach the models behind I think that you could roll off for cover saves and on a 6 land a lucky hit.

40k is a turn based strategy game
all events in a single phase happen unanimously
in order to pull a fire and advance within that structure
phase 1
team a moves ahead
team b remains still
phase 2
team a gtg
team b shoots
phase 3
nothing
phase 1 turn 2
team b moves up
phase 2 turn 2
team a shoots

2 units can move ahead fire and assualt
but if one is behind the other you must assume that they do so at the same time
no unit has the skill to hit the deck and fire unimpeded

either shoot or gtg not both

docbrown wrote:40k is a turn based strategy game
all events in a single phase happen unanimously
in order to pull a fire and advance within that structure
phase 1
team a moves ahead
team b remains still
phase 2
team a gtg
team b shoots
phase 3
nothing
phase 1 turn 2
team b moves up
phase 2 turn 2
team a shoots

2 units can move ahead fire and assualt
but if one is behind the other you must assume that they do so at the same time
no unit has the skill to hit the deck and fire unimpeded

either shoot or gtg not both

No, the game is an abstraction of how combat works in that universe and going by the fluff armies do not line up and shot all at once Napoleonic ear style. The rules also support this in their current form by allowing enemy units to give other units cover and by not having your own units get in your way when you fire. Frankly you're wrong on all counts about how combat works so take your stupid away from here lest I become infected.

well acctually 40k DOES NOT ALLOW YOU TO SHOOT THROUGH YOUR OWN UNITS UN IMPEDED
the units do not get out of your way
they simply stay in the way and its up to the firing unit to hit the enemy despite the friendlies in his way

in 40k units already confer a 4+ SAVE
we just made the SAVE a CHECK that determines who takes the blow

docbrown wrote:well acctually 40k DOES NOT ALLOW YOU TO SHOOT THROUGH YOUR OWN UNITS UN IMPEDED
the units do not get out of your way
they simply stay in the way and its up to the firing unit to hit the enemy despite the friendlies in his way

in 40k units already confer a 4+ SAVE
we just made the SAVE a CHECK that determines who takes the blow

Meh, so I made a mistake as I was browsing through the thread. Frankly the thought that your own nonvehicle units give the enemy cover is slowed and really ought to be changed in the next edition simply because combat doesn't work like that. Either way the idea of units with advanced weapons and targeting systems screwing up something that forces today can do is frankly slowed.

we thought so to

so much tactics are based on units behind units behind units

we hate that idea and find the game is better this way

docbrown- The GTG and shooting thing in real military forces is a basic tactic, mainly used to bound forward to assault an objective while keeping the enemy's head down. Once the assault happens, though, we don't fall into punches. It's all bullets all the time. Mostly. Well, sorta. Ok, you won't throw down your service rifle for a CCW but bayonets are still commonplace. I wonder where I can get a powerfist...

Norade- the tactic he is talking about has nothing to do with Napoleonic warfare, just CURRENT squad bounding tactics. Its one of the first things they teach us after making sure we can shoot the weapon and not kill each other. Keep the hostility down, you were wrong on your post but we aren't getting angry at you. Dakka is a friendly place!

Anyway, back on topic. The shooting through friendlies to a enemy cover save is there, not because of the intervening unit taking the shots, because the firing unit decides they cannot make the shot. Its in BRB somewhere, I just really don't remember where. What I want to make a rule for is shooting into an assault and not caring about the friendlies attached.

-cgmckenzie

edit:well, in the time I wrote this the above 2 posts came into being. I need to type faster.

IRL you're rarely going to miss a shot because of your own squad getting between you and the enemy and other enemy units would very rarely if ever give anything resembling cover to a vehicle. About the only time another body on the battlefield would give anybody cover is if you're looking to kill a specific person in a crowd, or if somebody is using a human shield. On a real battle field such as in WWII where the RoE would be rather relaxed one soldier standing in front of another would mean nothing because soldiers don't shoot at squads* they shoot at soldiers. This would be even less common if the planned gear for the FCS program went through let alone with 40k level tech.

Of course this being an abstraction of combat in a fictional universe we can really do whatever we want with regards to rules. I would say that vehicles never gain cover from non-vehicle or non-MC models and that friendly models never provide the enemy a cover save. I would also bring back target priority tests as more reasonable than enemy squads giving cover saves.

*Generalization obviously because things like suppressive fire can be aimed to pin an entire squad.

The GTG and shooting thing in real military forces is a basic tactic
yes but it is not supported by the 40k mechanics
all units move fire and assault simultaneously
pulling off this tactic is possible but is represented as taking twice as long and is much less effective
llike all war games and drama allot of it is glorified
in a standard fire and advance allot of the fire is meant as suppression fire
suppression is not a concept most non soldiers really get
its rarely in games or movies
40k is a fantasy war game with a scifi overlap
proper tactics do not apply
if you want exact tactics play a total war game
otherwise try this

work from the mechanics of the game and try to develop a concept within those mechanics
"if people really moved like this what would be the most real situation and set of rules"

i find it helps to ground the difference between america and the imperium

docbrown wrote:The GTG and shooting thing in real military forces is a basic tactic
yes but it is not supported by the 40k mechanics
all units move fire and assault simultaneously
pulling off this tactic is possible but is represented as taking twice as long and is much less effective
llike all war games and drama allot of it is glorified
in a standard fire and advance allot of the fire is meant as suppression fire
suppression is not a concept most non soldiers really get
its rarely in games or movies
40k is a fantasy war game with a scifi overlap
proper tactics do not apply
if you want exact tactics play a total war game
otherwise try this

work from the mechanics of the game and try to develop a concept within those mechanics
"if people really moved like this what would be the most real situation and set of rules"

i find it helps to ground the difference between america and the imperium

I'm sorry if I'm not exactly thrilled about taking the advice of somebody who types like they've never sat in a classroom before.

As far as working within the game rules how does my post above not work within the rules?

Norade wrote:IRL you're rarely going to miss a shot because of your own squad getting between you and the enemy and other enemy units would very rarely if ever give anything resembling cover to a vehicle. About the only time another body on the battlefield would give anybody cover is if you're looking to kill a specific person in a crowd, or if somebody is using a human shield. On a real battle field such as in WWII where the RoE would be rather relaxed one soldier standing in front of another would mean nothing because soldiers don't shoot at squads* they shoot at soldiers. This would be even less common if the planned gear for the FCS program went through let alone with 40k level tech.

Of course this being an abstraction of combat in a fictional universe we can really do whatever we want with regards to rules. I would say that vehicles never gain cover from non-vehicle or non-MC models and that friendly models never provide the enemy a cover save. I would also bring back target priority tests as more reasonable than enemy squads giving cover saves.

*Generalization obviously because things like suppressive fire can be aimed to pin an entire squad.

forgot about pinning but i dont like pinning
when you are pinned you dont sit there
the last thing you ever want to do is sit there and do nothing
you fight against being pinned

it'd be better for a situation to resut in negative effects
say your in a pinned type situation
imagine your BS goes down you cant move but you can shoot at get a 1+ to cover
however leadership works against this somehow to

but im blabbering about things that arent for 40k
me and a freind are actually working on a concept for our own game
however im stuck trying to create a formula for points values


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Norade wrote:

docbrown wrote:The GTG and shooting thing in real military forces is a basic tactic
yes but it is not supported by the 40k mechanics
all units move fire and assault simultaneously
pulling off this tactic is possible but is represented as taking twice as long and is much less effective
llike all war games and drama allot of it is glorified
in a standard fire and advance allot of the fire is meant as suppression fire
suppression is not a concept most non soldiers really get
its rarely in games or movies
40k is a fantasy war game with a scifi overlap
proper tactics do not apply
if you want exact tactics play a total war game
otherwise try this

work from the mechanics of the game and try to develop a concept within those mechanics
"if people really moved like this what would be the most real situation and set of rules"


i find it helps to ground the difference between america and the imperium

I'm sorry if I'm not exactly thrilled about taking the advice of somebody who types like they've never sat in a classroom before.

As far as working within the game rules how does my post above not work within the rules?

you didnt cross that line was directed at the other poster
and forgive my typing im in the process of changing the way I type and its not exactly a smooth transition

Yeah, I get real world tactics/mechanics don't really apply here. I was pointing something out, but it sorta devolved to a completely different point. Sorry about that.

And pinning is just that, you are pinned and do not have the morale/training/testicular fortitude to move. You fail your pinning test and are flat against a wall/hiding in cover/in the fetal position and can't do anything. Trust me on this, it takes a lot of training or balls to move when being shot at. The pinning is one of the things I think is actually somewhat realistic in 40K.

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:Yeah, I get real world tactics/mechanics don't really apply here. I was pointing something out, but it sorta devolved to a completely different point. Sorry about that.

And pinning is just that, you are pinned and do not have the morale/training/testicular fortitude to move. You fail your pinning test and are flat against a wall/hiding in cover/in the fetal position and can't do anything. Trust me on this, it takes a lot of training or balls to move when being shot at. The pinning is one of the things I think is actually somewhat realistic in 40K.

-cgmckenzie

i get the no movement
but no action at all
period?
thats extreme reaction
its basically saying
either your tough as nails or a freaking baby

It's not a matter of being a baby, its basic human instinct. On the other side of this cover is a guy actively working to kill you with bullets impacting all around you. Americans are one of the only nations that assault there way out of an ambush/pinning. It seems like the obvious solution to us, but only because thats what we have seen culturally for 50 years or so in movies, tv, and video games. The tactic still surprises our allies most of the time, they see it as us trying to live out war movies and such. But it is hard to argue with the results.

Anyway, it is extremely difficult for a unit that is pinned to be able to rescue themselves. Instead they rely on friendly units to remove the threat or atleast draw fire enough for a counter attack.

Remember, the game cycle is fluid. We have it broken into turns for ease of use but it all happens at once. So a pinning scenario might only have the squad out of action for 30 seconds or so.

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:It's not a matter of being a baby, its basic human instinct. On the other side of this cover is a guy actively working to kill you with bullets impacting all around you. Americans are one of the only nations that assault there way out of an ambush/pinning. It seems like the obvious solution to us, but only because thats what we have seen culturally for 5 years or so in movies, tv, and video games. The tactic still surprises our allies most of the time, they see it as us trying to live out war movies and such. But it is hard to argue with the results.

Anyway, it is extremely difficult for a unit that is pinned to be able to rescue themselves. Instead they rely on friendly units to remove the threat or atleast draw fire enough for a counter attack.

Remember, the game cycle is fluid. We have it broken into turns for ease of use but it all happens at once. So a pinning scenario might only have the squad out of action for 30 seconds or so.

-cgmckenzie

On that note this is why Americans also tend to be the only forces that still use small unit bayonet rushes against the enemy.

Oh my, no. We don't do bayonet charges in the slightest! I mainly attach it for moments when I know things are going to be tight. I would be willing to bet my 40k collection that SEAL Team 6 had bayonets on when they paid Mr. Bin Laden a visit.

If I remember properly, the last deliberate, pure bayonet charge(running at enemy, rifle at hip, and yelling) was in Afghanistan in '03ish by British SAS forces. They were in a building, ran out of ammo, reinforcements weren't coming any time soon. The Leftenant(whatever the british ranks are) made the order to 'fix bayonets' and they charged out of the house. It worked and they didn't loose anybody.

I need to stop rambling on off topic points, sorry

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:Oh my, no. We don't do bayonet charges in the slightest! I mainly attach it for moments when I know things are going to be tight. I would be willing to bet my 40k collection that SEAL Team 6 had bayonets on when they paid Mr. Bin Laden a visit.

If I remember properly, the last deliberate, pure bayonet charge(running at enemy, rifle at hip, and yelling) was in Afghanistan in '03ish by British SAS forces. They were in a building, ran out of ammo, reinforcements weren't coming any time soon. The Leftenant(whatever the british ranks are) made the order to 'fix bayonets' and they charged out of the house. It worked and they didn't loose anybody.

I need to stop rambling on off topic points, sorry

-cgmckenzie

Oh, I know they aren't common but the Brits have used it (that was the exact example I was thinking of) and I'm sure that American forces would use it if they really got stuck in with no other choices.

i guess it makes sense but the problem i see is simple

you are pinned by fire
a unit then has time to assault then move then shoot again then assault again until you are able to do anything
thats steep

Pinning should work like a wall of suppressive fire. -1 BS, -2 LD, -1 INI, -50% movement distance.

Difference to what it is now is that you can still perform all actions just at a slightly lesser efficiency.

The current pinning rules are too strict in my opinion, but then again, there aren't many weapons with pinning that people actually use anyway.



As for the proposed rule for the thread, I think that's a wonderful idea. I'll be bitter since I'm vanilla sally's and not guard, but it's a fair if not a little too powerful rule.

How about this?

Shooting into Melee: Imperial Guard Company Commanders can issue an order that allows a squad to fire into an assault, measuring line-of-sight and working out Cover Saves normally. If the target unit is at least 50% obscured by a friendly unit, then any successful cover save(s) taken by the target unit results in the inflicted wound(s) being resolved against the obscuring unit.

Suppressive Fire/Pinning: Any unit may attempt to suppress an enemy infantry squad in lieu of shooting normally. Until the beginning of their subsequent Movement phase, the number of shots each non-blast and non-template weapon within the attacking squad may fire is doubled, but every model within the unit counts as BS1. After all shooting has been resolved, the target squad must immediately take a Pinning Test, subtracting -1 from their Ld. characteristic for every 5 shots fired by the attacking unit. If the test is failed, then the suppressed squad goes to ground.

Units that have gone to ground may attempt to fire during their subsequent shooting phase, but must first pass a Morale test (if suppressed, the Ld. modifiers above are still in effect).




A little random, but... the suppressive fire mechanic above would make Heavy Bolters a much more attractive option.