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 said to myself I wasn't gonna do this, but "AW HERE IT GOES!"

If you've been in some other threads that I put up recently, you'll know I'm in a brainstorm that I can't seem to get out of... And today we're about to embark on a fantastic voyage that no fan of any game should ever go on. ....

REWRITING THE ING CORE RULES!

Thinking about turn structure and my war movies started it all while chatting with buds, and downing a few brews. Was noting how troops would often fall into a formation, advance, then spread out to their covers. Something not really covered in the rules. Sure, you could say they did that 'behind the scenes' or actually manipulate your movement in some way to do this. Your squads can certainly pile in a trench, shifting from a block or watch circle to a firing line. But I wondered, would it add anything to give a marginal formation shift to the movement phase?

So here is the log over the waterfall, no turning back now!...

Movement Phase-
---'Rally' Step: Check units for morale and status conditions like 'Pinned'.

>>>Follow the two steps below, unit by unit, for all units that you control, until you have moved all units you control and wish to move.
---'Form Up' Step: Each model in the unit may move up to 2" in any direction, that does NOT bring it closer then your unit already is to any enemy unit. (I can hear your screams through the Force already! You cannot know the true power of the Dark Side! Muwahahaha) This move must restore coherency from last turn*, and maintain unit coherency.
---'Move Out' Step: Move the currently selected unit according to it's own movement rules, ending in unit coherency.

>>>Once all your controlled units have moved, finish with the following step.
---'Take positions'(?) Step: Each squad may follow the same rules as the 'Form Up' step, However this does not count as movement for heavy weapon wielders. It is merely them moving a step or two or shifting their emplacement marginally. (Muwahaha! Your pain is palpable to the All Seeing Eye of Sarumon! Or whoever. )

Then onto shooting and assaulting and everything else. We used this to play a small 500pt game and had great fun with the new squad level micro-managing. Nobody thought it would be a good idea in games much bigger than that though, too complicated. As the asterisk might imply, there was more changing we had done to sort of streamline our version. And yes, we are primarily Magic:TG players if you are wondering at our phase/step format.

I'm going to go hide for a minute until your rages have been somewhat sated. Don't be too harsh! But give it your best!

(Edit: Had to remove some efforts to make the above chart easy to read. Because they didn't. Oops.)

give my latest developments a couple threads over a looksee - I'm going much heavier on the phase/step and comprules from mtg, as well as slapping in important items from the QJM like Wear and threat indexing. Line of Sight for the entire unit will be important, and the game will have an actual timing resolution mechanic (woo!) instead of "lol roll a dice lol".

Poked around a bit at your threads mr chrisrawr sir. Sorry, but just a little to over the top in complexity for me. Remember I was inebriated when I was doing this And your missing something I can't quite put my finger on. Good luck dude!

Soooo, no other oppinions to offer? What did y'all think?

I don't think it's necessary, as you're not really achieving anything as you can't get closer to your enemy. It could also be argued that no matter what you're doing, you will always be getting closer to your enemy as unit x is there so you can't move in that direction, y is there so no, and so on.

The best use I can find for this is in having to bring a special weapon, like a flamer, to the front of the squad that you previously had in the back to prevent them being shot to hell. That could be achieved by going

-> move phase -> Initiative test to reform -> Pass & reform or fail and remain

I think it's good but overly complex, however maybe putting it on a characteristic test gives less to do for the same desired result. I'd restrict it to swapping positions with another model though, so you could don't end up moving the unit closer than it should be.

Or did I miss the point entirely?

Am I reading this right? As long as form up dosent take you closer to the enemy you get an extra 4 inches to move ( 2 from form up and 2 from take pos?) What about moving laterally to claim an obj etc? What about retreating out if gun range? How does it work with transports?

Effort is appreciated but it seems complex, sirt of unnecessary ( whats the real value behind it?) and not fleshed out enough imho.

That's more like it! Yes, these were all concerns me and my buds were batting around. Great feed back! Thank you, thank you, thank you. Lets get the snowball rolling down the hill now eh? For now we'll address the points of Kitch102 and Ratius. In order for fairness. Brace yourselves, this is a long post.

The initial idea had us saying you could get closer to an enemy. This got thrown out right away as on the first turn one guy brought his marines 15 (includes a 5" run) whole inches forward to take a great terrain feature for cover on turn ONE We, were like WHAAAAT?. We had to address that while we wanted more 'squad level maneuvering', we had to consider the base distance change to the enemy of six inches as a cardinal rule. The 'fluff' discussion we had later to explain why the units couldn't approach enemies, but could move 'behind the point man or, indeed men, (not being sexist, relax ) was that we generally figured it would be harder to approach an enemy firing at you and not get shot like a red shirt, then moving sideways, or obviously retreating from them like cowards. Perhaps we were idealistic here, but we felt we had represented our desires to change formations/solidify held ground sufficiently while hopefully not swinging the games timing or whatever. But we're noobs, Emperor forgive us if we majestically botched this. As you keenly point out kitch102, it really is the positioning of your special weapons that got helped here. We had played too many games where our heavy units got picked off for being caught unawares, or killed for trying to bring said special weapon to bear in the first place. Perhaps we're still not playing right and trying to patch over our play errors.

And yes, when the unit gets sufficiently close to the enemies lines, 'Form Up' and 'Take Positions' usually don't do much as at best the squad is just changing orientation inside a circle. Most of these extra moves happened in turn one or two. We wondered at a possible addendum that said you only checked for 'point men' against units within LOS, or possibly a certain distance like 36", or that you never counted flyers when checking. Otherwise the rules could be completely useless. But ultimately we never ironed this out. We like the 'swapping model' idea by the way. We are on the fence and arguing the characteristic test, but it sounds easy enough to work out. (This talk started via texting)

Yes Ratius you are correct! These moves can be used to shift over towards objectives, and run away from gun range! We joked as we played that the above rules made running away too easy. It is in effect: cautiously approach six inches, or get ten inches the heck out of there, or run around to the flank! We did start to notice that sneaky encircling motions could happen as you slowly creep around. We didn't work it much with the one transport that was on table. I'll have to ask the guys. My vote going in is that the 'disembark' move is all the unit is focused on and as it now allows you to deploy 6", what would the point of another two be? Shouldn't the disembark have gotten them through the 'Take Positions' step all at once? Certainly I think they'll say there isn't a 'Form Up' step for them. But 'Take Positions' will be a lengthy DERP filled talk, which may require more beer to solve!

Unnecessary, yes, no doubt. As said, you could achieve the same with normal rules and creativity.
Fun add in, that gives more of our own cinematic goofiness to the game, also yes. And it allowed one guy to sort of pile in his squad for a sort of organised charge. after being spread out to minimize a buddies deathray flyer.

One buddy texted me today that he wanted to run three squads of marines in another 'lil 500pt gig, and march them onto the table in blocks and columns like roman legions, each squad two columns five rows to make a block, and all three blocks side by side. Then use the form up/take positions to shift them all over and make a gun wall. We'll see if the marines last long enough.

KEEP FIRING! What else you got?

LOL, you're sort of winning me over with your sheer passion KW, great stuff

Honestly I think you'd have to have a characteristics test, as you're denying your opponent the opportunity to snipe or otherwise kill your special weapons through line of sight. It'd be like that model having an invulnerable or cover save of some sort. At least by adding a characteristics test you're giving yourself a disadvantage to counter the protection that you've had through manouvering, after all what use was it if it turns out you can't use it?

If I deploy 1 unit in the center of my DZ, and 1 unit on each flank, any movement you make, except for backwards, brings you closer to one of my units.

While the idea of more detail in smaller games is neat, it really becomes overly complex in a game of any significant size.
As written, it's extremely easy to prevent the movement.

Or, did you mean to say 2" move movement that doesn't bring you closer to the nearest enemy?

An alternate to this would be a 2" move that cannot take place if you are within 12" of an enemy, and cannot bring you within 12" of an enemy.
Of course, this lets you back away shooting a bit too effectively, and might work better with alternating activation, rather than an IGO-U-GO system.

For smaller games, try playing with kill team squads. Build a ~600 point army as normal (with no single choice over 200 points), Prior to deployment, any squad can be split in half (remaineders rounded as player chooses), and then acts as their own unit. Units that are kill teamed with only 1 model remaining only rally on snake eyes.
So 8 storm troopers can split into 2 units of 4.
10 marines can combat squad into 2 units of 5, then kill team into units of, 3,2 and 3,2

It basically gives you a lot more smaller units to really get a skirmish feel, without playing a giant game.

-Matt

Well hopefully this works. I've made a diagram! It should appear below. So, when you 'Form Up/Take Positions', you can't move closer then you already are to an enemy unit, here's the clarifying part: as determined by your point man. When we were doing this we determined it like this with point men. I forgot to put that up here. The original posts phrasing I thought was sufficient to say this, compare the two to see what I mean. It certainly makes it a Warp of a lot easier to determine and explain this way.

MY BAAAD!

Cool! It worked! That's Awesome. After the diagram below, the unit could then move six inches freely, and redetermine 'point men' for the new position for the next 'Form Up/Take Positions' step. Oh and quick note: If you 'Run', you don't get another 'Take Positions' step for it. We thought that fair mechanically and fluffily. You just have to hope no one saw you trying to steal a base...of fire! (Bwahaha, I'm so silly.)

Does this help? Any questions? Pleads for insanity?

What though if there was another enemy squad between enemy squad A nd B. Could your blue point man move to where he is now?
It would take him certainly further away from A and B but not (hypothetical) C.
Would they have to hold position then?

You mean like this? GREAT QUESTION! I'm starting to wonder about drunken rule writing... If so, the 'Point Man' Would have to determine the big baddie as the closest, and with the current phrasing, no one could move closer then he is to it. Here's our rules flaw that i think Ratius was keen to see, and we never thought of: That would mean that the squad could move closer to A and B even while not getting closer to the Big baddie! Cheating! If we worded it that all three enemy squads were taken into consideration, the above example still works, as the green blue 'Point Man''s position compared to all three enemy units has kept the rest of the squad behind all three distances.

I think this is what were talking about.

LOL "big bad guy". Great stuff KW.
Yeah it poses some problems the 2/4" "free" move with the restriction of not closing with the enemy.
I'll have to give it some thought, Friday night isnt the best time for that however lol.

One last example and that's all for today. We are probably all asking it. What if your surrounded? Well, it would like this I guess...Yeah, it's starting to get complicated...dang it.

HI Knucklewolf.
Some ideas I had that are similar , for my rules in development.

Reform after moving..
After the unit passes a morale check.(LD test.)
Any 'special minature' ,( leader, character, speacial or heavy weapon combatant.)May swap places with any ordinary minature.

Duck back.
After the enemy unit has declared an attack, but before it is carried out.
If the unit passes a morale (LD test.)And special minature may swap places with any ordinary minature.

Going to ground.
If the unit remains stationary and does NOT make a ranged attack , it may go to ground.A unit that has gone to ground counts as in cover/obscured
(Vehicles Go hull down.)

Diggging in.
An infantry unit that has gone to ground, may dig in if it passes a morale check.(LD test.)
An infantry unit that is dug in may re any failed cover save rolls of 1 or 2.

Just some basic ideas that may be useful to you?

DUUUUDE! Lanrak my friend... you get a whole free cupcake...but it's just pretend, soooooo...here ya go *hands lanrak a cupcake of digital awesomeness*

Now aren't you all curious why Lanrak got a whole free cupcake? I will tell you now, while you enjoy your digital pastries. There's plenty to share.

'Reform', nice. Duck back, cool. I'm skipping straight to Lanraks 'Digging In' mechanic. The triple 'g' spelling error aside, LOL, this is fant-abulous. It is something that my gang was think tanking to no avail. Digging in as a concept on a battlefield in action is hard to do. Traditionally, debatably, you only get a chance to 'dig in' one of three times. Before a battle reaches you, like entrenching artillery batteries behind/as part of Germany's WWII Atlantic wall. In pauses of fighting between extended engagements, say like digging and covering foxholes in the Arden during the Battle of the Bulge. Or right after seizing ground before potential counterattacks, like when the British and German armies were waging war back and forth across the desserts of the Afrika Campaign. (These last two examples I distinguish slightly, strange maybe, but sensible to me.) In the middle of a firefight, which [arguably] a game of Warhammer40k is, there really isn't much time to do a whole lot to 'dig in'. Except maybe jump into a captured enemy foxhole. At worst you might 'flip a table over' or some such. So if you decide like Lanrak has to do it as a game mechanic and option, how do you do it? Well, you might want to try doing it the way Lanrak has:

WITH A LIMITED REROLL! CUPCAKES FOR EVERYBODY! Let's break it down now. If I start getting too ahead of myself or away from what you meant, just chime in and disregard the photons I have displayed on your screen. (Clerver, ain't I?) Readers may disregard until we get to the NOW WERE BACK part, it may not be necessary to read it all.

Now I'm not sure about the 'going to ground' version here though, which is important because of how you run 'Dig-In'. Quite ingeniously together I might add. For a few reasons like not firing, hull down tanks, and remaining stationary. Taking a sidetrack here, I don't think GW used the right phrase for their version of the game. I think they meant 'Hit the Deck' but hey, whatever right? Please, examine...

1.) Not firing or moving. Makes sense, they are too busy trying not to die after all. The question is have they curled into the fetal position of a coward, did they duck in a foxhole not necessarily represented by terrain, or did they drop to a prone firing position? The last of those I think is the one GW uses, ceratinly the one I like, very shooty. So the question after that is do you have a 'Hit the Deck' and a 'Go to Ground'? There is an arguable difference and you absolutely can have both. Here's my thing: In a game where every turn of use out of a game piece counts, or in a gunfight where every gun, soldier, and second count, losing that one second of fire or that one turn of rolls hurts the army as a whole. In Magic we call this phenomenon a 'Dead Card' or 'Dead Draw'. In 40k even not destroyed, it's a 'Dead Unit'. It;s just a sitting duck as your opponent can guess it's going to be there for a while and deal with it as he pleases. But when dudes go to ground, what you got here is kind of what happens. So for the term your dead on mechanically to fluff wise just maybe needs shined up a bit. We're still friends right?

2.) [I get a little here, watch out] Vehicles can't go to ground, technically. One of the GREAT things about 40k is learning how to use a variety of units and that they do not all function the same way in many cases at all. Like a Flyer vs. a Tank vs. a Soldier. So when you have a tank on the field you have to use it with tank tactics in mind right? The cover system of the infantry assumes your models can duck behind pillars or crouch below a wall that, again, might not even be represented by terrain. Even though the model can't, but just because the entity it represents can, right? You with me? So the problem with a tank is if its sitting still, its just that, sitting still. It can't just say it built it self some sand bag barriers y'know? The couple hundred ton vehicle cant shimmy up behind his dead guardsmen buddy's smoking corpse and say 'I'M INVISIBLE' . Instead the driver and commander work together to figure out a way to orient the tank behind substantial barriers that are represented in terrain pieces, because they need to be big to cover a tank after all. So in game terms, you have to actively take that tank (using his normal move rules) from cover to cover, that is how it 'goes to ground'. Then use the literal height of the gun in conjunction with a periscope to target enemies, blah blah blah . The point is that for your various fighting ground vehicles, it's a whole 'nother 40k game. They don't have the flexibility of an infantry unit or the speed and flying of a jet plane. You get to learn how to deal with these limits and guide your armor to dominating positions where they can open fire freely. By the by, I cant wait to see someone deploy four Flyers in a wing with tactics based in reality, that would be devastating.

NOW WER'E BACK!

So this limited reroll is an awesome idea. You're kind of playing off the same principal as 'ballistic skills hire than five' thing because you have a chance, then a last desperate chance. Awesome. So you have the leader issue orders and guide his/her troops using a LD test, to get his/her unit to really thematicaly 'dig in'. This is representative of how they would direct fire volleys and reload times and call out incoming fire vectors. Anything they can to stay alive and keep shooting. By limiting the reroll to say ones and twos like you did, you also create those cinematic moments where the guy ducks or turns his head right before the bullet goes by where he would have been moments before. Back to your 'Duck back' and 'Reform' also amazing. Again playing off your important yet somewhat under used leadership scores to direct units at the squad level. Perfect. I just might keep these around. Thanks Bro!

Hi Knucklewolf.
Slight typos and other errors due to being distracted by my children.(Nerf Guns with whistling ammo!!)

Here is a slight revision.(Children quieter for now.)

Reform.(As above.)

Duck Back.(As above.)

Change 'Go to Ground' title for 'Secure Position.'
(It may fit fluff better, and not conflict with current 'go to ground.')

'Hull down' should have realy been the vehicle equivelent to infantry 'Digging In'.

As you rightly say vehilces can normaly claim 'cover /obscured ' when behind actual peices of gameing terrain.

What I wanted to do was give the option for vehicles to 'secure a position ' in cover and get a bonus ,IF they pass a LD check.
(Either allow a cover save roll/re roll, OR make oponent re roll 5s and 6s on the damage chart.)

Just some basic ideas you may like to develop further.
(I think a tactical option to improve survivability , is a nice addition to a wargame.)