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.

insaniak wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:But im upset that you can capture and objectivee while inside a vehicle.

You can do that now...

I'm upset that you can do it now.

I meant "Cant"

The second option is the WFB way, so it would not surprise me much.

H.B.M.C. wrote:1. Move.
2. Charge.
3. Shoot.
4. Resolve Assaults.

^ This.

I expect that considering this is how WHFB currently does it that this is the way that 40k will do it, too. It'll change things, particularly with new rules on casualty removal, snapfire and overwatch, but you should still be able to soften up units before you assault them - you'll just have to watch that you don't soften them up too much so that they wind up out of your charge distance. Granted, this is what smart opponents do anyway in 5E, so you'll just have to be careful with it.

It only makes sense to combine the Move and Charge steps, as those are essentially the same thing.

1. Move.
2. Charge.
3. Shoot.
4. Resolve Assaults.

Given this is how it will work. You would snapfire first BEFORE they can shoot since as far as I understand SnapFire is a reaction to the charge. Meaning You can lose some vital front line units before you get to shoot. But in the long run, this changes very little to me from the current system other than the snapfire occurring.

It also makes JSJ seem a little weird, would it occur in the Charge Phase or the Combat Resolution? The latter threatens to eliminate the tactic outright!

In Warmachine, you can charge or shoot, but not both in the same turn except for a few exceptions (Eg: Harkevich's feat) This seems to be a step in that direction. It just remains to be sen how all this snap fire and overwatch stuff works. It seems to me that it would make up for any time saved by consolidating movement.

I like all the movement happening at the same timer even if assaults are not fought until later

All movement at once will end the problem of models suddenly gaining a few bits of distance which can happen when you pick the model up and move it upwards to three times in a turn (move, fleet, charge). Its very elegant and from playing the pancake edition its my favorite part in that the amount of time it saves is very noticeable.

warpcrafter wrote:In Warmachine, you can charge or shoot, but not both in the same turn except for a few exceptions (Eg: Harkevich's feat) This seems to be a step in that direction. It just remains to be sen how all this snap fire and overwatch stuff works. It seems to me that it would make up for any time saved by consolidating movement.

Well that's the way it was in 2nd Ed 40K as well. Seems they're heading back there.

And it still works just fine, as shown with pancake edition. Not to mention Necromunda, etc.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:In Warmachine, you can charge or shoot, but not both in the same turn except for a few exceptions (Eg: Harkevich's feat) This seems to be a step in that direction. It just remains to be sen how all this snap fire and overwatch stuff works. It seems to me that it would make up for any time saved by consolidating movement.

Well that's the way it was in 2nd Ed 40K as well. Seems they're heading back there.

Same with Rogue Trader.

To be honest, if 6th edition turns out to have a lot of the rumors discussed, I'll be pretty happy.
I really like this:

1. Move.
2. Charge.
3. Shoot.
4. Resolve Assaults.

I'll also be happy if they make running part of the movement phase, like it should be. My friends and I pretty much already play like it is but it would be nice to have something on paper to show it.

I'm not in a big rush to see 5th out the door just yet, now that I am finally getting used to the ruleset. But I do hope that 6th is fun to play, everything else to me is secondary. : )

My impression of the rule is that it will be slightly different from WFB.

A correct summation of the WFB phases in question would be:

1. Charge or move
2. Shoot
3. Resolve combat

Given that the rumour says "It's move, assault, then shoot now!" I am speculating that the 40K phases will go:

1. Move
2. Charge
3. Shoot (or Run)
4. Resolve combat

People who don't play WFB may not see a clear distinction there, but there is one. In WFB you choose to either execute a charge move OR pass it up in order to make a normal move or march.

I suspect that in 6th edition 40K you will always get the option to make a normal move, and go through your whole army normally, performing every unit's move. After that will come an assault phase, where you go through your army making charge moves.

Now just why would you suspect that?

Simply because the rumour was phrased "It's move, assault, then shoot now!" (as I attempted to indicate).

Like I said, you could not accurately call what goes on in WFB "move, assault, then shoot". For one thing, it's a choice between moving or assaulting. For a second, the charges you do declare actually occur before the rest of your normal moves.

So if the system was becoming an analogue of the WFB one I would have expected the rumour to say:

It's assault, move, then shoot now!

or

It's assault/move, then shoot now!

EDIT: Although if it worked differently in pancake edition I suppose I would concede that whatever that version was would be most likely. Anyone want to remind me how it handled the phases?

Or the person meant is as resolve moving, resolve assaults, and resolve shooting? Or we should just wait too weeks instead of speculating based on some dude's rumors?

I thought that, ccording to rumours, the CSM codex isn't due until Q3 or Q4? if this is the case they will continue selling the current 'dex until about August/September (if the codex is due in October/November)

The Havocs kits is a hybrid. The HB is plastic, the ML, LC and Ac are metal. All the models have platic backpacks.

ShumaGorath wrote:

insaniak wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:But im upset that you can capture and objectivee while inside a vehicle.

You can do that now...

I'm upset that you can do it now.

As a friend of mine who's been to Afghanistan says "oh boy, you have no idea how good tanks are at claiming objectives. They're the best there is!" (paraphrased and loosely translate from Swedish with a bit of political incorrectness removed)

They will need to do a major erratta overhaul on abilities and powers if they swap up the phases. One of the problems in the pancake edition is a lot of stuff ceased to make sense or be of any value because it happened in the wrong phase for it to be of any use.

Like being able to ignore targeting priority in 5th?

Mahtamori wrote:As a friend of mine who's been to Afghanistan says "oh boy, you have no idea how good tanks are at claiming objectives. They're the best there is!" (paraphrased and loosely translate from Swedish with a bit of political incorrectness removed)

I've always been confused as to why people keep trying to say that "in real life troops can't really hold objectives in their vehicles" because that's just silly. Both times I was in Iraq (I was in the US Army despite my now living in Brittany) I saw armored vehicles hold positions very, very effectively.

That said, as an issue of game balance I would be fine with making troops have to get out to claim objectives but that depends on the other rules for transports.

Holding position is not the same as capturing objectives. I always imagine that the objective required some kind of interfacing like a laptop or an artifact thats being dug up. Not just a position like a mosque or somethin

Well, I'm a bit disappointed now. The discussions here and at other boards let revive the leaked rule set.

wuestenfux wrote:Well, I'm a bit disappointed now. The discussions here and at other boards let revive the leaked rule set.

The pancake edition everyone loved and wish was true?

terranarc wrote:Holding position is not the same as capturing objectives. I always imagine that the objective required some kind of interfacing like a laptop or an artifact thats being dug up. Not just a position like a mosque or somethin

I've always thought of it as being near whatever it is you're capturing and keeping the other guy from getting it, other things like collecting documents or whatever can wait until after the fighting is done. That said, I recall playing some missions in 3rd where you had to pick something up and get off the table with it, I could see needing dismounted infantry for that sort of thing.

I'd also be fine ewith the rumor of vehicles not being able to contest, as much as I like that vehicles got better in 5th I think needing non-vehicle units to contest would make for better gameplay.

I woudl think of it as the vehicle can roll in and clear the initially take the objective, but troosp woudl be needed to actualyl hodl it.

it's a feeble example (i've not been in the forces so have no real life experience)....ever played Battlefield 3 on conquest and tried to capture a control point in a tank or a jeep by yourself? No matter what you do there will always be one enemy guy hding who can only be flushed out by friendly troops to secure the objective.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:In Warmachine, you can charge or shoot, but not both in the same turn except for a few exceptions (Eg: Harkevich's feat) This seems to be a step in that direction. It just remains to be sen how all this snap fire and overwatch stuff works. It seems to me that it would make up for any time saved by consolidating movement.

Well that's the way it was in 2nd Ed 40K as well. Seems they're heading back there.

Less heading back to 2nd and more heading toward WHF structure.

I'll be interested to go through the pancake PDF and contrast/compare the rules with 6th ed proper.

If movement/assault moves are made at the start of the turn, but resolved at the end, suddenly both sides of the rumor make sense - the turn phase is move/shoot/assault but assault lock-ups are made in the movement phase. I think that's how fantasy operates and given a lot of these rumors i think that's how we'll see 40K operate as well. Players will have to spend a turn maneuvering and softening up assault targets before going in for the kill.

Players will have to spend a turn maneuvering and softening up assault targets before going in for the kill.

So.. makes assault even worse then if you have to spend an entire turn softening up people instead of just shooting and assaulting.

I really hope this isn't *more* biased towards shooting than 5th.

Has anybody thought of the possibility that assault weapons/pistols are fired during the rumored charge phase? (didn't see it mentioned previously...unless I'm just blind) I wonder if that's what the advantage of having an assault weapon will be. Cinematically, I see this making sense...the squad begins their charge, pouring fire from their assault weapons into the enemy before they make contact. I would assume that it would be as some penalty to BS, though. Just my two cents.