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 play warhammer fantasy more these days with skaven and i used to be a guard player for 40k. Thing is in the previous skaven army book you could shoot into any skaven unit in combat with another unit since they were 'expendable' and it was a rule.

I just find it a little odd with 40k being so dystopian and the imperium considering acceptable losses with guardsmen even to the extent that commissars execute soldiers and one of their fluff and game guard characters uses guardsmen's lives being expendable as his go to tactic for every battle since ever ("Knowing their weakness i sent wave after wave of my own men after them until they reached their pre-set kill limit and shut down."). It's just for an uncaring army that considers guardsmen extremely disposable and that killing a few dudes off can save more you'd think blowing up a bunch of striking scorpions, ork boyz, etc. engaged with conscripts or similar would actually be a go to tactic for guard.

As far as nids go i can see nids doing similar in the way of something engaged with gaunts since they are all guided by a hive mind.

With orks they probably think it'd be funny to see their buds getting blown to pieces by themselves and considering their hap-hazard nature it probably happens anyway.

I suppose the problem with guard shooting into their own combats is that game-wise it'd make them far more powerful than they already are unless they get toned down with their book. I can fully understand seeing it happen to conscripts or possibly even guardsmen though. Veterans and stormtroopers might give the guard a bit of pause when thinking of shooting into them as they're more valuable. I'm not sure how this would work with abhumans like ogryns and ratlings mostly because they're seen as lesser by guardsmen in some ways and yet i'd take most of them over a normal guardsman or conscript any day.

Balance. That's why.

This gets brought at least once a month, and its always a bad idea.

Just imagine a Guard player feeding you cheap, disposable 10-man squads, then when you're all bunched up with your expensive marines, base to base, I drop 4+ plates and wipe your squad away. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Balance.

*Edit* And that's without discussing why nearly every codex is justified into shooting into combat. The exceptions being Eldar, and maybe marines, though even they would take shots, trusting their brothers and their aim.

I suppose that's true unless it only worked on conscripts or possibly the rest of the army was toned down a lot like in the previous army book. I dunno i just think it seems really odd considering the nature of imperial guard and the imperium as a whole. Space marines are often too valuable but i don't think CSM would care about shooting a blast into cultists. Cultists are basically the cannon fodder of CSM anyway. I might understand tau not shooting into their own guys but tau might consider it to be the 'greater good' or something. I dunno.

So anyway just my thoughts on the matter. Doesn't make sense to me according to the lore.

"But sir we're about to sacrifice an entire planet to wipe out the orks/chaos taint/tyranids."

'I don't care. Do it.'

"Sir one of our squads is engaged with a bunch of ork nobs and will probably die anyway. Should we fire into them?"

'Oh dear god what is wrong with you man?! I'm going to give you a psych evaluation when we get home....which generally involves torture, confession of sins and then death by immolation.'

--------------

Btw in the case you mentioned ranged shots come before melee and no 10 man guard squad is going to last more than 5 seconds of real time versus even an average combat oriented squad esp. if they get charged by the enemy. I mean if you get charged with guardsmen you'd need quite a few and a commissar just to not run away or survive more than the initial combat.

The point is, you can't justify it without being able to justify it for literally every other codex. Its hugely imbalancing against close combat armies, and favours armies like IG and Nids more who have dirt cheap hordes to tie up the enemy while you shoot.

Its honestly just not a good idea. Hard to actually justify fluff wise, complicated to implement rules wise, and horribly imbalancing game wise.

Trying to work fluff into game mechanics is generally a bad idea and apt to drive a mind insane. After all, if we were to adapt the fluff to tabletop, it would be impossible to table orks, guard, nids, and crons, Special Characters would be unkillable and regularly kill entire armies, and Space Marines would win every conflict. While yes, practically every army (with the possible exceptions of Eldar and Tau) would be perfectly happy to shoot into their own troops if it meant killing a bunch of the other guy, it's just not sensible from a game balance standpoint. And while this game isn't exactly well-balanced, that doesn't mean we need to go out of our way to rock the boat.

I think it would be way more realistic. Every war to date has had instances of intentional collateral damage. I think when your numbers get down and they havent broken then shootng into your own combat should be a viable option. Maybe a house rule if not accepted universally.

I just feel that it could be done somehow but you'd need to work out how it'd work so that it's not incredibly terrible in balance.

I find it incredibly hard to believe it'd be impossible to table guard if the games worked like fluff. It'd be more like if guard isn't facing orks, eldar, cultists, traitor guard, genestealer cults or a tyranid splinter fleet then they pretty much auto-lose the fight. I haven't seen guard win one fight against tau since ever. It's pathetic man.

All i'm saying is that at the very least seeing guard shooting into their own dudes with super explosions from artillery and tanks instead of worrying about who they hit they might actually win in the fluff a little more. I know it sounds odd but if a crazy assault oriented unit is cutting through guys and makes marines cry in melee then chances are you'd rather have some guardsmen keep them company in melee before gibbing the whole lot of em.

because they can't?

and what ruled are you proposing?

I would propose.
If there is 25% or less of your orig unit in CC, the next shooting phase you may shoot into your own close combat.
Reason being from a models perspective
The unit is dying and your comrades are going to have to handle what you couldnt. You dont want the war to be lost if theres an opportunity.
It just should be an option

Karamazarov or what his name is has it, but only on paladins iirc

 HumeyKillar wrote:
Karamazarov or what his name is has it, but only on paladins iirc

Nah its anyone, he can center orbital strikes on his own models and they don't scatter

 Ineedvc2500 wrote:
I would propose.
If there is 25% or less of your orig unit in CC, the next shooting phase you may shoot into your own close combat.
Reason being from a models perspective
The unit is dying and your comrades are going to have to handle what you couldnt. You dont want the war to be lost if theres an opportunity.
It just should be an option

How would you allocate wounds? All hits go to enemy, all misses go to your own unit?

If you decided to, the shooters would treat it as a regular enemy unit that unfortunately has frendlies however they are aware of what their general is asking of them and the importance. Misses are misses. Chalk it up to shakey hands. All scored hits would be divided evenly rounding up based on percentage of models present in the CC. Simple Example 20 guys vs your now dying 5 guys (which for simplicity is/was 25% of your starting unit) Total 25. 5/25 20% of all scored hits would be friendly fire and 80% would hit enemy.
For percentage (anything that can attack aka melee)
Vehicles hull points left equal # of models. Round down
Chariots wounds left equal # of models. Round down
Granted vehicle/chariot must have 25% hull points or wounds left in order to shoot.
Riders/crew count as 1 model
Characters count as 1 model
Mounts count as 1 model
If i left anything out...sorry
I just think there should be a rule for it.

 Ineedvc2500 wrote:
If you decided to, the shooters would treat it as a regular enemy unit that unfortunately has frendlies however they are aware of what their general is asking of them and the importance. Misses are misses. Chalk it up to shakey hands. All scored hits would be divided evenly rounding up based on percentage of models present in the CC. Simple Example 20 guys vs your now dying 5 guys (which for simplicity is/was 25% of your starting unit) Total 25. 5/25 20% of all scored hits would be friendly fire and 80% would hit enemy.
For percentage (anything that can attack aka melee)
Vehicles hull points left equal # of models. Round down
Chariots wounds left equal # of models. Round down
Granted vehicle/chariot must have 25% hull points or wounds left in order to shoot.
Riders/crew count as 1 model
Characters count as 1 model
Mounts count as 1 model
If i left anything out...sorry
I just think there should be a rule for it.

You know I started reading this, and then just lost interest it is far to complicated.

The 25% would mean 2-3 guardsman who already run away. IMO that restriction would mean it's never used.

I would use the BS to see hostile/friendly hit percentage, 3-50% 4-66% ...

But it would need much more balancing.

Lathor wrote:
The 25% would mean 2-3 guardsman who already run away. IMO that restriction would mean it's never used.

It does mean you can't be screwed over by getting most of your guardsmen slaughtered in melee but then rolling double ones and staying in the fight

now whether thats balanced or not is another matter

If it works only on double ones I think it's balanced cause it so rarely used it has no real effect.

For an effective use there should be some balancing, it would need an attached commissar, army wide doctrine for x points, or an order from CCS. Maybe a KP to the enemy.

I think that firing into CC should be allowed, but any miss is an automatic hit on the nearest friendly model to the firer.

Rustgob wrote:
I think that firing into CC should be allowed, but any miss is an automatic hit on the nearest friendly model to the firer.

Tats how I'd work it, forget all this complex percentage crap, it's far to open to error. Straight down the line risk is what it needs.

Im sorry if percentages are complicated for you. The decision to fire at friendlies shouldnt be a quick and easy one. Do you really think all dice being rolled should hit something? I think its more complex than that. Hell, i would even say the shooters must take a leadership test before they fire into CC..
For the IG.
Yes 2-3 guardsmen will run unless they pass their leadership test and remain in CC in which case you should have the option.
There has to be a cost for this. Low BS would get no benefit if all misses hit there own. High BS would dominate

 Ineedvc2500 wrote:
Im sorry if percentages are complicated for you. The decision to fire at friendlies shouldnt be a quick and easy one. Do you really think all dice being rolled should hit something? I think its more complex than that. Hell, i would even say the shooters must take a leadership test before they fire into CC..
For the IG.
Yes 2-3 guardsmen will run unless they pass their leadership test and remain in CC in which case you should have the option.
There has to be a cost for this. Low BS would get no benefit if all misses hit there own. High BS would dominate

To meet halfway with my own idea (Shooting allowed, all misses hit friendly unit); It could be made more dangerous (and realistic) by saying that anyone firing into a melee does so at 1/2 BS (rounded down), to represent the danger of hitting friendlies in the melee.

I was kinda against this after reading this at first but I think it would be pretty cool if you could only snap fire into combat. You follow the same resitrictions (i.e. no blasts or flames, since you could hit your own men.) And the snap fire reduction of BS would take into account the flow of combat, that lucky chance to hit an opponent. Maybe any rolls of 1 are a hit of your own men?

Id be on board with either of those ideas


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I was also trying to make a universal rule for fantasy as well


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hmm maybe thats why it came off confusing

 Ineedvc2500 wrote:
Im sorry if percentages are complicated for you. The decision to fire at friendlies shouldnt be a quick and easy one. Do you really think all dice being rolled should hit something? I think its more complex than that. Hell, i would even say the shooters must take a leadership test before they fire into CC..
For the IG.
Yes 2-3 guardsmen will run unless they pass their leadership test and remain in CC in which case you should have the option.
There has to be a cost for this. Low BS would get no benefit if all misses hit there own. High BS would dominate

Sorry I made that post at half 5 this morning, came off a lot more hostile than was intended.

I just think messing around with to much maths during a game can become time consuming, and don't forget there are a lot of kids playing this game.

I think someone has hit the nail on the head with using snap shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But I still think there needs to be a way of taking casualties from your own unit, something like each model must pass a armour save? Maybe that will be to strong.


Perhaps an initiative test, then armour if they fail

No worries mate. I was just tryin to do most thorough rule with justification and example for both
40k and fantasy.

 Ineedvc2500 wrote:
No worries mate. I was just tryin to do most thorough rule with justification and example for both
40k and fantasy.

Probably why it went straight over my head then, combination of 5.30 in the morning, maths and fantasy. Was never going to work for me

Here's my suggestion:

When firing into a squad already engaged in close assault, the firing squad rolls to hit *as if* it is making snap shots.

No re-rolls of any kind are permitted when firing into close assault (it's too much of a mess to aim properly, and psychic visions just make it worse). Every roll of a "1" scores a wound on a friendly model, resolved as per usual.

When a flame or template weapon is fired, it simply inflicts a hit on every model caught under the template (friendly or otherwise).

About horde armies:

Yes, this would be an advantage to them. Also, I might be biased, being a 'nids player. But, y'know, isn't that part of the fluff and strategy of a horde army?

What if Lord Commissars gave their unit the ability to shoot into a combat? It's just one unit, and requires a vulnerable HQ who is rarely taken to work, so it won't be game-breaking, plus he can't join vehicle squadrons can he?

It might just end up with Lord Commissars being taken more...

Well I learned something new today, the Vindicare Assasin can shoot in to combat.

Q. Can a Vindicare Assassin target a model
locked in close combat?
A. Yes – how cool is that?!

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1180142_Witch_Hunters_FAQ_2004-08_5th_Edition.pdf

FuzzyLogik wrote:
Well I learned something new today, the Vindicare Assasin can shoot in to combat.

Q. Can a Vindicare Assassin target a model
locked in close combat?
A. Yes – how cool is that?!

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1180142_Witch_Hunters_FAQ_2004-08_5th_Edition.pdf

If that's the link to your FAQ, that is really out of date?