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.

Any codex who is write with multiple over laping units and abilities being used would be super punished. If I use two or three activations to buff up one of my big units, and my opponent just deletes the buffed up unit, then I just wasted 2-3 moves.

And if the army happens to be elite, then there is a good chance that there is no replacment unit for the destroyed one, specialy if the points go down. an activiation system would be a huge buff to hordes and armies that can run 6+ good units, because even if someone wipes out two units of intercessors there is still 4 more identical units on the board. If your opponent blows up your knight castellan or aura buffer in his two first moves, and your army stops to work without the aura or spell, then the game is done right there, just as fast as it is today. Maybe even faster.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
hence why we switched it around alot in 8th with KT like activation and cover rules (not bad but required a bit of downsizing of the game to 1.5k or 1k.)
Or adapted terrain rules like KT which made shooting overall a lot less deadly.

how did you deal with armies running 2-3 thunderfire cannons and 9 eliminators or full flyer lists, even with KT terrain rules?

Tlos, want to strafe a unit you can't see because it has a roof over it, the flyer ain't going to dakka that. can still bomb it though. A bit of abstraction. ( also we changed that around in a more private ish setting between close friends and we didn't bring top of the crop competitive lists except when we were testing some performances for ourselves.)

And eliminators aswell as thunderfire were and are still issues but that has less to do with their capability but rather with GW not appropriatly pricing them.

Every functional version of AA 8th I have seen has made allowances for activating certain units together. X unit plus y character within 3" plus z unit that protects x or y.

Necrons warriors a cryptek and it's lich guard. Or Tau firewarriors their fireblade and a drones unit. Etc etc.

Wanna Da Jump your Boyz? Then activate the psyker with the Boyz and do it.

Want to combine like 5 activations abilities? Then gamble on wether the enemy sees what you are doing and tries to stop you or not.

that far we didn't go, didn't need to, considering how much better just implementing KT stuff was, didn't fix the other core issues though with CP batteries, and wombo combos sadly were still very much important, just less insta gibbing of 3-500 pts in the first turn.

 Lance845 wrote:
Every functional version of AA 8th I have seen has made allowances for activating certain units together. X unit plus y character within 3" plus z unit that protects x or y.

Necrons warriors a cryptek and it's lich guard. Or Tau firewarriors their fireblade and a drones unit. Etc etc.

Wanna Da Jump your Boyz? Then activate the psyker with the Boyz and do it.

Want to combine like 5 activations abilities? Then gamble on wether the enemy sees what you are doing and tries to stop you or not.

But there is no gambel for most armies. When I have 4 characters and one unit of 10 paladins, then everyone knows what a GK player is going to to do with it. And the counter argument of don't playing a paladin bomb is a weak one, because besides that GK don't really have a good way of going against other armies good stuff.
Playing an army with a lot of strikes or a lot of termintors is just playing a much weaker version of a regular marine army, that just costs more points.

normal marines have it good, because they can buff stuff with auras or have 4 mastercrafted thunder hammers in close proximity to each other. Elite armies on the other hand have more or less pre build phases, you know where the Astral Aim goes and so does your opponent, you know where the blessed ammo for the 10 man squads goes, because you are going to have max 2 of those in your army. Prognosticators etc both you and your opponent know where and when it is going to be cast.

AA can be implemented only in the way apoc did it, by reducing the total activations (detachments instead of units).

Else, the game would be impossibly long. You add a "Thinking time" between each action, because I have to see the outcome of your action before I can decide my next one.

In the IGOUGO system, there is no need for such thinking time. By the time it is my turn, I've had enough time to ponder my next actions, especially since the movement psy and shoot phases come early in the turn, which are the ones which shape the battlefield the most.

Funny, the contrary was true for us.

AA beeing faster then IGOUGO.

Karol wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Every functional version of AA 8th I have seen has made allowances for activating certain units together. X unit plus y character within 3" plus z unit that protects x or y.

Necrons warriors a cryptek and it's lich guard. Or Tau firewarriors their fireblade and a drones unit. Etc etc.

Wanna Da Jump your Boyz? Then activate the psyker with the Boyz and do it.

Want to combine like 5 activations abilities? Then gamble on wether the enemy sees what you are doing and tries to stop you or not.

But there is no gambel for most armies. When I have 4 characters and one unit of 10 paladins, then everyone knows what a GK player is going to to do with it. And the counter argument of don't playing a paladin bomb is a weak one, because besides that GK don't really have a good way of going against other armies good stuff.
Playing an army with a lot of strikes or a lot of termintors is just playing a much weaker version of a regular marine army, that just costs more points.

normal marines have it good, because they can buff stuff with auras or have 4 mastercrafted thunder hammers in close proximity to each other. Elite armies on the other hand have more or less pre build phases, you know where the Astral Aim goes and so does your opponent, you know where the blessed ammo for the 10 man squads goes, because you are going to have max 2 of those in your army. Prognosticators etc both you and your opponent know where and when it is going to be cast.

I'm sorry GW sucks at balance. GW being bad at making your armies rules doesnt mean the basic structure of the game should stay worse so that you can exploit that structure to build a death star unit. In aa your army looses. In igougo your army still looses but so does everyone else for having the shittier game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
AA can be implemented only in the way apoc did it, by reducing the total activations (detachments instead of units).

Else, the game would be impossibly long. You add a "Thinking time" between each action, because I have to see the outcome of your action before I can decide my next one.

In the IGOUGO system, there is no need for such thinking time. By the time it is my turn, I've had enough time to ponder my next actions, especially since the movement psy and shoot phases come early in the turn, which are the ones which shape the battlefield the most.

Apoc has some great rules but saying it takes longer is untrue. I've played it. It's not longer. What's your experience with actually playing?

Spoletta wrote:
Else, the game would be impossibly long

if a game is too long or not has nothing to do if there is Alternating Unit Activation, Alternating Phases or Alternating Player Turns (or if any if those is IGoUGo or Action/Reaction based)

It is only about how many steps need to be made to get one Activation/Phase/Turn

usually this comes down to dice rolls, measurments and checks

if I need to measure all models in a unit for range or just one makes a difference in speed, same if I need to roll dice for each one or just for the unit etc
If this is done via Unit Activation with IGoUGo or Unit Activation with Action/Reaction makes no big difference any more

Another point is, the more often I need to touch the models, the more time it takes

So having the possibility to move my units 3 times per turn, one time per phase and I need to go thru all of my units with the first move before I can make the secound one, this makes the game longer
Unit Activation, Alternating Phases or Alternating Player Turns has no influence on the speed here
(some might remember that a common house rule in 5th was that movement+running and charge if the unit could do it, was done in one go to speed up the game)

 Blackie wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Nothing would change if my opponent rolled the saves or overwatch or anything, so calling that interaction isn't so much a stretch so much as it is just plain inaccurate.

What about choosing what casualties to remove, fighting with engaged models (maybe even against multiple targets) and the possibility of using stratagems?

From your perspective even rolling to hit, to wound, etc is never an interaction because the defending player can make all those rolls for the attacking player and nothing would change as well. Basically the entire dice rolling wouldn't be an interaction

You aren't choosing what casualties to remove with overwatch, and once again you're still trying to talk about triggered actions rather than making choices. Also, most Strats that are used during the opponents turn are the same. They're mostly "make this unit harder to kill", which is rarely a thing that's a hard decision to make.

Lance845 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Every functional version of AA 8th I have seen has made allowances for activating certain units together. X unit plus y character within 3" plus z unit that protects x or y.

Necrons warriors a cryptek and it's lich guard. Or Tau firewarriors their fireblade and a drones unit. Etc etc.

Wanna Da Jump your Boyz? Then activate the psyker with the Boyz and do it.

Want to combine like 5 activations abilities? Then gamble on wether the enemy sees what you are doing and tries to stop you or not.

But there is no gambel for most armies. When I have 4 characters and one unit of 10 paladins, then everyone knows what a GK player is going to to do with it. And the counter argument of don't playing a paladin bomb is a weak one, because besides that GK don't really have a good way of going against other armies good stuff.
Playing an army with a lot of strikes or a lot of termintors is just playing a much weaker version of a regular marine army, that just costs more points.

normal marines have it good, because they can buff stuff with auras or have 4 mastercrafted thunder hammers in close proximity to each other. Elite armies on the other hand have more or less pre build phases, you know where the Astral Aim goes and so does your opponent, you know where the blessed ammo for the 10 man squads goes, because you are going to have max 2 of those in your army. Prognosticators etc both you and your opponent know where and when it is going to be cast.

I'm sorry GW sucks at balance. GW being bad at making your armies rules doesnt mean the basic structure of the game should stay worse so that you can exploit that structure to build a death star unit. In aa your army looses. In igougo your army still looses but so does everyone else for having the shittier game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
AA can be implemented only in the way apoc did it, by reducing the total activations (detachments instead of units).

Else, the game would be impossibly long. You add a "Thinking time" between each action, because I have to see the outcome of your action before I can decide my next one.

In the IGOUGO system, there is no need for such thinking time. By the time it is my turn, I've had enough time to ponder my next actions, especially since the movement psy and shoot phases come early in the turn, which are the ones which shape the battlefield the most.

Apoc has some great rules but saying it takes longer is untrue. I've played it. It's not longer. What's your experience with actually playing?

Reread my post, i never said that Apoc takes too long.

kodos wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Else, the game would be impossibly long

if a game is too long or not has nothing to do if there is Alternating Unit Activation, Alternating Phases or Alternating Player Turns (or if any if those is IGoUGo or Action/Reaction based)

It is only about how many steps need to be made to get one Activation/Phase/Turn

usually this comes down to dice rolls, measurments and checks

if I need to measure all models in a unit for range or just one makes a difference in speed, same if I need to roll dice for each one or just for the unit etc
If this is done via Unit Activation with IGoUGo or Unit Activation with Action/Reaction makes no big difference any more

Another point is, the more often I need to touch the models, the more time it takes

So having the possibility to move my units 3 times per turn, one time per phase and I need to go thru all of my units with the first move before I can make the secound one, this makes the game longer
Unit Activation, Alternating Phases or Alternating Player Turns has no influence on the speed here
(some might remember that a common house rule in 5th was that movement+running and charge if the unit could do it, was done in one go to speed up the game)

I disagree with this this analysis. The phases that require you to touch the models don't take particularly longer than the ones where you roll dices. Actually, the movement phase tends to be one of the shortest ones.

That doesn't mean that moving a piece takes no time, it still take some, hence the common habit of moving and running together to save time in 5th. You will perform the same actions and take the same time both in one system and in the other, what changes is the decision time of involved players. In IGOUGO it's almost zero, since you start your turn and already have a plan, you need to stop and rethink your actions midturn only if the dices demand so. In AA, any action from the opponent may require you to rethink your next move.

People like to spout off about how IGOUGO is the antithesis of good gameplay, and is the definition of cancer which is eating away at 40k.

Guess what: It's not.

IGOUGO is perfectly fine so far as an order of operations go, and is not inherently flawed. Now it is flawed in 40k, but 40k is flawed to the extent that shifting from IGOUGO would not fix it. Not to mention it'd make already long games take even longer.

For a good example of IGOUGO done well, look at Apocalypse. The implementation of "Remove casualties after the battleround" fixed nearly all IGOUGO grievances.

 morganfreeman wrote:
People like to spout off about how IGOUGO is the antithesis of good gameplay, and is the definition of cancer which is eating away at 40k.

Guess what: It's not.

IGOUGO is perfectly fine so far as an order of operations go, and is not inherently flawed. Now it is flawed in 40k, but 40k is flawed to the extent that shifting from IGOUGO would not fix it. Not to mention it'd make already long games take even longer.

For a good example of IGOUGO done well, look at Apocalypse. The implementation of "Remove casualties after the battleround" fixed nearly all IGOUGO grievances.

You know Apoc isn't IGOUGO right?

Spoletta wrote:
what changes is the decision time of involved players. In IGOUGO it's almost zero. since you start your turn and already have a plan, you need to stop and rethink your actions midturn only if the dices demand so. In AA, any action from the opponent may require you to rethink your next move.

the time a player wants to take to make a decision has nothing to do with what turn sequenze you use

Chess is the best example, as it is IGoUGo, the time to make decision how to move should be Zero because you already had enough time to think about what to do while you waited for the opponent to make his move
except that you cannot make your decision until the opponent is done, you can think about your posibilities but if your turn takes zero time or not has nothing with IGoUGo (more like how unexpected the move of the opponent was)

Just because more time passes with alternating player turns, than with alternating phases does not mean that people take less time thinking about what to do at the start of their turn

"Thinking" time is the only thing the rules cannot handle unless you add a time limit and a clock
the rules can speed up dice rolls, measurment, checks, model handling, but not how long a player wants to take to make a decision unless you add a timer

an there is a reason why chess with a timer playes different than without

but timed chess does magically playes faster because they switched from alternating model activation to alternating player turns


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
You know Apoc isn't IGOUGO right?

I guess a lot of people don't know what IGoUGo really means but just use it to describe "classic GW type Turn based games" because GW called it that way

IGOUGO means Player A takes their Turn, then Player B takes their turn.

Chess is IGOUGO. 40k is IGOUGO. Apoc is alternating action based on detachments.

Counterpoint: Infinity could also be described as "IGOUGO" but it has vastly more stuff for players to do when it isn't their turn. GW's design model of one player spending twenty minutes doing stuff while the other player watches and then switching isn't purely down to the discrete turns.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
IGOUGO means Player A takes their Turn, then Player B takes their turn.
Chess is IGOUGO. 40k is IGOUGO. Apoc is alternating action based on detachments.

this is what I meant, some people use the term as "everything that GW is doing is IGoUGo"

and technically, 40k is not IGoUGo any more as the opponent can interrupt my "Go" and I have to wait until his interruption is done to finish my action

Spoletta wrote:Else, the game would be impossibly long.

There are a lot of games that make it work, so clearly there are some unexamined assumptions in your post.

Leaving aside the possibility that decision time being done during your opponent's short activation means there is negligible additional downtime, there are clearly lots of things slowing down 40K that have nothing to do with activation. For starters, getting rid of re-rolls would more than offset any delay imposed by AA. If your concern is game length, there are bigger fish to fry.

morganfreeman wrote:People like to spout off about how IGOUGO is the antithesis of good gameplay, and is the definition of cancer which is eating away at 40k.

Guess what: It's not.

IGOUGO is perfectly fine so far as an order of operations go, and is not inherently flawed. Now it is flawed in 40k, but 40k is flawed to the extent that shifting from IGOUGO would not fix it. Not to mention it'd make already long games take even longer.

For a good example of IGOUGO done well, look at Apocalypse. The implementation of "Remove casualties after the battleround" fixed nearly all IGOUGO grievances.

Apocalypse is AA.

What non-GW AA games have you played?

 kodos wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
what changes is the decision time of involved players. In IGOUGO it's almost zero. since you start your turn and already have a plan, you need to stop and rethink your actions midturn only if the dices demand so. In AA, any action from the opponent may require you to rethink your next move.

the time a player wants to take to make a decision has nothing to do with what turn sequenze you use

Chess is the best example, as it is IGoUGo, the time to make decision how to move should be Zero because you already had enough time to think about what to do while you waited for the opponent to make his move
except that you cannot make your decision until the opponent is done, you can think about your posibilities but if your turn takes zero time or not has nothing with IGoUGo (more like how unexpected the move of the opponent was)

Just because more time passes with alternating player turns, than with alternating phases does not mean that people take less time thinking about what to do at the start of their turn

"Thinking" time is the only thing the rules cannot handle unless you add a time limit and a clock
the rules can speed up dice rolls, measurment, checks, model handling, but not how long a player wants to take to make a decision unless you add a timer

an there is a reason why chess with a timer playes different than without

but timed chess does magically playes faster because they switched from alternating model activation to alternating player turns


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
You know Apoc isn't IGOUGO right?

I guess a lot of people don't know what IGoUGo really means but just use it to describe "classic GW type Turn based games" because GW called it that way

Chess is an AA game, and the perfect example of why they take longer to play by definition. The time that passes between my opponent's main action and the start of my actions is zero in chess. Reason why a chess game can take a long time even though the actual mechanical movements of a game could be done in less than a minute.

 kodos wrote:
and technically, 40k is not IGoUGo any more as the opponent can interrupt my "Go" and I have to wait until his interruption is done to finish my action

IGOUGO with interruptions is till IGOUGO as the fundamental structure- and that's fine. When people complain about IGOUGO, they're complaining about pure I-do-everything-with-no-opportunity-to-react IGOUGO that 40K embodies. I think the vast majority of people asking for AA would be satisfied by IGOUGO with reactions a la Starship Troopers, Infinity, or Dust.

There's nothing sacrosanct about wholly alternating unit activations. The most direct benefit is the increased interactivity and ability to respond, which can be accomplished multiple ways. AA is a shorthand for that kind of interactivity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
Chess is an AA game, and the perfect example of why they take longer to play by definition. The time that passes between my opponent's main action and the start of my actions is zero in chess. Reason why a chess game can take a long time even though the actual mechanical movements of a game could be done in less than a minute.

Chess is IGOUGO. Each turn is wholly independent from prior ones. There is no restriction on activating your queen a second time until every pawn has activated too.

 catbarf wrote:

Spoletta wrote:Else, the game would be impossibly long.

There are a lot of games that make it work, so clearly there are some unexamined assumptions in your post.

Leaving aside the possibility that decision time being done during your opponent's short activation means there is negligible additional downtime, there are clearly lots of things slowing down 40K that have nothing to do with activation. For starters, getting rid of re-rolls would more than offset any delay imposed by AA. If your concern is game length, there are bigger fish to fry.

morganfreeman wrote:People like to spout off about how IGOUGO is the antithesis of good gameplay, and is the definition of cancer which is eating away at 40k.

Guess what: It's not.

IGOUGO is perfectly fine so far as an order of operations go, and is not inherently flawed. Now it is flawed in 40k, but 40k is flawed to the extent that shifting from IGOUGO would not fix it. Not to mention it'd make already long games take even longer.

For a good example of IGOUGO done well, look at Apocalypse. The implementation of "Remove casualties after the battleround" fixed nearly all IGOUGO grievances.

Apocalypse is AA.

What non-GW AA games have you played?

I'm not saying that AA means "long games" by definition. If your game is designed for that, it will work. Applying the AA scheme to a game like 40K that takes a long time even with the IGOUGO system, will create problems.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:

 kodos wrote:
and technically, 40k is not IGoUGo any more as the opponent can interrupt my "Go" and I have to wait until his interruption is done to finish my action

IGOUGO with interruptions is till IGOUGO as the fundamental structure- and that's fine. When people complain about IGOUGO, they're complaining about pure I-do-everything-with-no-opportunity-to-react IGOUGO that 40K embodies. I think the vast majority of people asking for AA would be satisfied by IGOUGO with reactions a la Starship Troopers, Infinity, or Dust.

There's nothing sacrosanct about wholly alternating unit activations. The most direct benefit is the increased interactivity and ability to respond, which can be accomplished multiple ways. AA is a shorthand for that kind of interactivity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
Chess is an AA game, and the perfect example of why they take longer to play by definition. The time that passes between my opponent's main action and the start of my actions is zero in chess. Reason why a chess game can take a long time even though the actual mechanical movements of a game could be done in less than a minute.

Chess is IGOUGO. Each turn is wholly independent from prior ones. There is no restriction on activating your queen a second time until every pawn has activated too.

You have a really strange definition of what a IGOUGO game is then... Chess is AA, there is no other way to look at it.

Spoletta wrote:
You have a really strange definition of what a IGOUGO game is then... Chess is AA, there is no other way to look at it.

No, not really, I just don't think you're really examining the mechanics. The distinguishing characteristic of IGOUGO vs AA is turn structure. If each activation is in the context of a larger 'round' that limits what each activated piece can do until the next round begins, it's AA. If each activation is wholly independent from the previous one, with no activation-to-activation restrictions, it's IGOUGO. The number of pieces you are allowed to activate at once is not relevant; it can be IGOUGO whether you're allowed to activate your entire army at once or just one piece.

Chess as it currently stands- where each activation is independent and can be any piece, regardless of how many times it has already activated- is IGOUGO.

A theoretical chess variant where you can only activate a piece a second time after every other piece has been activated, turning the game structure into a sequence of turns (in which each piece will activate exactly once) subdivided into individual piece activations, would be AA.

Edit: To put it another way, it's a matter of time scale. IGOUGO has you resolve the entirety of events within a time step (a turn) at once. AA subdivides the time step to resolve constituent components sequentially, allowing opportunity for counterplay. A chess turn represents a discrete (albeit highly abstract) time step, as does a Bolt Action turn, but in the latter the turn is subdivided into a number of activations. Each activation models what an actor is doing during the encompassing time step, and only once all activations have been resolved can you move on to the next time step.

Phased games are a method of incorporating AA elements into the IGOUGO structure. Rather than have you resolve all your forces' actions for a given time step, the time step is subdivided into phases during which both players have the opportunity to act.

 catbarf wrote:

 kodos wrote:
and technically, 40k is not IGoUGo any more as the opponent can interrupt my "Go" and I have to wait until his interruption is done to finish my action

IGOUGO with interruptions is till IGOUGO as the fundamental structure- and that's fine. When people complain about IGOUGO, they're complaining about pure I-do-everything-with-no-opportunity-to-react IGOUGO that 40K embodies. I think the vast majority of people asking for AA would be satisfied by IGOUGO with reactions a la Starship Troopers, Infinity, or Dust.

There's nothing sacrosanct about wholly alternating unit activations. The most direct benefit is the increased interactivity and ability to respond, which can be accomplished multiple ways. AA is a shorthand for that kind of interactivity.

A thought thru Reaction System would be fine, it is just that GW mixes stuff together to solve problems that have nothing to do with it

eg:
Alternating Player Turns, but as tose take too much time and the opponent gets board, instead of making the game faster, they let the opponet roll some dice so he has something to do
did not help, they added Reactions and all kind of stuff
the original problem stayed, the turn takes too much time


I would ask for Unit Activation just that GW need to think thru all the steps and remove those that are not needed.

Spoletta wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
Chess is an AA game, and the perfect example of why they take longer to play by definition. The time that passes between my opponent's main action and the start of my actions is zero in chess. Reason why a chess game can take a long time even though the actual mechanical movements of a game could be done in less than a minute.

Chess is IGOUGO. Each turn is wholly independent from prior ones. There is no restriction on activating your queen a second time until every pawn has activated too.

You have a really strange definition of what a IGOUGO game is then... Chess is AA, there is no other way to look at it.

IGOUGO is a system where you take a group of actions together and then it is your opponent turn.

MTG is an IGOUGO.

AA is a system where you take a single action and the turn passes to your opponent.

Legends of Runeterra is an AA

This is the definition I use and I think that it is the defintion that anyone would commonly use.

But let's go with your definition and say that chess is an IGOUGO. Since the action quantum that you take as your "turn" is equivalent to the quantum of action of an hypotethical AA 40K, you can easily see how that would mean an increased decision time required. We can change the semantic, but the concept is the same. Smaller actions per player --> More game time required.

Now, don't misunderstand me. I love apoc and I vastly prefer AA games over IGOUGO games, but I would be lying to myself if I thought that a 3 hour game in 40K would still be a 3 hour game with an AA system applied.

 kodos wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
what changes is the decision time of involved players. In IGOUGO it's almost zero. since you start your turn and already have a plan, you need to stop and rethink your actions midturn only if the dices demand so. In AA, any action from the opponent may require you to rethink your next move.

the time a player wants to take to make a decision has nothing to do with what turn sequenze you use

Chess is the best example, as it is IGoUGo, the time to make decision how to move should be Zero because you already had enough time to think about what to do while you waited for the opponent to make his move
except that you cannot make your decision until the opponent is done, you can think about your posibilities but if your turn takes zero time or not has nothing with IGoUGo (more like how unexpected the move of the opponent was)

Just because more time passes with alternating player turns, than with alternating phases does not mean that people take less time thinking about what to do at the start of their turn

"Thinking" time is the only thing the rules cannot handle unless you add a time limit and a clock
the rules can speed up dice rolls, measurment, checks, model handling, but not how long a player wants to take to make a decision unless you add a timer

an there is a reason why chess with a timer playes different than without

but timed chess does magically playes faster because they switched from alternating model activation to alternating player turns


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
You know Apoc isn't IGOUGO right?

I guess a lot of people don't know what IGoUGo really means but just use it to describe "classic GW type Turn based games" because GW called it that way

Chess is actually AA. If it were IGOUGO, all the white pieces would move before the black ones.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Chess is actually AA. If it were IGOUGO, all the white pieces would move before the black ones.

Define for us, if you would, your definition of AA and IGOUGO. Because I have a feeling you're operating under some faulty information.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Chess is actually AA. If it were IGOUGO, all the white pieces would move before the black ones.

Define for us, if you would, your definition of AA and IGOUGO. Because I have a feeling you're operating under some faulty information.

I have to agree with Slayer-Fan: chess is AA; not IGOUGO.

AA = Players take turns activating one piece/unit/detachment. This could be all phases of the turn (ex. APOC), or just a specific phase (ex. shooting in Kill Team is AA while movement is more IGOUGO).

IGOUGO = Player 1 activates all of their pieces/units/detachments and takes actions with all of them in all phases of the turn (movement, psychic, shooting, melee, etc.). Then Player 2 does the same for their side. Ex. 40k; Blood Bowl; AOS.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Chess is actually AA. If it were IGOUGO, all the white pieces would move before the black ones.

if it would be AA it won't be allowed to move the same piece several times in a row but each one must be moved once before any other piece is moved again

IGoUGo is a different name for Turn Based Game, you make your turn and the opponent makes his turn
there is no further restriction what you can do each turn, if you can move one piece a turn or all pieces a turn, it is still one turn for me and one turn for you

Alternate Unit Activation is also IGoUGo as I activate a unit, you activate a unit, but not as in a turn based game, as the game-turn is done after both activated all units

hence why I rather talk about Alternating Player Turns VS Alternating Unit Activation

Spoletta wrote:

Now, don't misunderstand me. I love apoc and I vastly prefer AA games over IGOUGO games, but I would be lying to myself if I thought that a 3 hour game in 40K would still be a 3 hour game with an AA system applied.

of course, because the stuff that slows the game down has nothing to do with the turn sequenze used and using AA for 40k without removing the stuff that slow the game down would result in the same slow game

 Gnarlly wrote:
I have to agree with Slayer-Fan: chess is AA; not IGOUGO.

AA = Players take turns activating one piece/unit/detachment. This could be all phases of the turn (ex. APOC), or just a specific phase (ex. shooting in Kill Team is AA while movement is more IGOUGO).

IGOUGO = Player 1 activates all of their pieces/units/detachments and takes actions with all of them in all phases of the turn (movement, psychic, shooting, melee, etc.). Then Player 2 does the same for their side. Ex. 40k; Blood Bowl; AOS.

Looking at whether you activate one thing or several is overly reductionist. Missing the forest for the trees. You can have IGOUGO systems where only one unit activates at a time, and you can have AA systems where multiple units activate at once.

If there is no subdivision of the turn into alternating activations by both players, it's not AA. If a single game turn doesn't involve both players alternating back and forth within it, it's not AA.

I've some old Avalon Hill wargames where the number of units you can activate in a turn is dictated by the quality of your C&C. If you have poor C&C, you might only be able to activate one unit per turn, if you have good C&C, it would be more. The IGOUGO implementation is player A performs all the activations they can, then player B does the same, and repeat for the length of the game. The AA implementation is within a turn, each player alternates carrying out an activation until both have completed their full number of activations, then the turn resets.

Chess is exactly that first type, with the limitation of a fixed value of one activation per player per turn.

The relevance here is that an actual AA system with one-piece-at-a-time activation usually imposes the limitation that a piece cannot be activated again until all units have activated and the round resets. In contrast, single-activation IGOUGO allows for a 'cheerleader effect', where activations are often put into one unit over and over again. Infinity works this way; it is firmly an IGOUGO system despite the use of limited activations and a robust reaction system.

I can understand the argument that chess is igougo.

AA breaks up the game turn into a series of back and forth turns. It tends to have the limitation that once something has been activated it cannot be activated again until the next game turn.

A single move in chess is not a piece of a bigger game turn. It's the entire turn. Therefore it's igougo.