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.

It struck me earlier that not every guy in the the world would want to move, shoot, assault. I started thinking of various movies where the combatants didn't get in to combat at all, they just got close, shot, then dodged around and shot some more.

So my thought was replacing the assault phase with another movement phase in which a unit can move as normal, or opt to get in to assault using the normal rules.

How would this affect JSJ units? No idea, I've not got that far. Maybe just bonus distance, or a skewed version in which the JSJ unit can pop off another shot at BS1?

I can't see it affecting large tanks, maybe skimmers / generally fast moving vehicles. Kinda struggle to see anything with heavy or with tracks doing this though.

What do you think?

So you'd kick melee while it's down by allowing EVERYONE to effectively JSJ? No. Just no.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
So you'd kick melee while it's down by allowing EVERYONE to effectively JSJ? No. Just no.

This...

I don't think shooting needs any more help this edition.

Also not gonna "bare" with you, save that for your gf/bf.

If you look at it that way, then yeah I guess, though allowing everyone to JSJ means that you're able to chase units, keeping the distance fairly even.

It gives units that otherwise wouldn't have anything to do in assault, something to do.

It adds an extra tactical layer to the game, and to me makes assault much more of a useful defensive thing, as staying out in the open allows other units to surround you in less time.

And it's more cinematic


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Baronyu wrote:


This...

I don't think shooting needs any more help this edition.

It could hamper your opponents shooting - think about moving a unit you don't mind getting shot in front a unit that you want to protect.

Also not gonna "bare" with you, save that for your gf/bf.

I dunno what you mean... the header says bear with me... Honest...

And it's wife

I think it would bury assault units. There would literally be no point in assault unit's, if shooting unit's could move out of assault range after shooting.

 kitch102 wrote:
If you look at it that way, then yeah I guess, though allowing everyone to JSJ means that you're able to chase units, keeping the distance fairly even.

It gives units that otherwise wouldn't have anything to do in assault, something to do.

It adds an extra tactical layer to the game, and to me makes assault much more of a useful defensive thing, as staying out in the open allows other units to surround you in less time.

And it's more cinematic

Sure, it adds another tactical layer to the game, at the expense of completely and utterly fething over assault. If an assault unit moves 12" plus run moves per turn towards a shooty unit and the shooty unit moves away 12" while shooting, the only progress that assault unit could possibly make is the run move, which could be invalidated by casualties from shooting in the first place. It adds an incredibly situational boon to assault units, who can already close in during the assault phase since that's what charges are for, while giving shooting units the ability to delay close combat by another two turns. It simply isn't a good idea in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

Evileyes wrote:I think it would bury assault units. There would literally be no point in assault unit's, if shooting unit's could move out of assault range after shooting.

Maybe just a D3" or D6" move? Still gives assault units the 2D6" charge. Perhaps an assault units counter to that would be to have a 3D6" charge range... It may give the need for further sub classification of "types" of assault units though, so as I write this though I realise that doing so would negate the point of this, so maybe it's best left off.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 kitch102 wrote:
If you look at it that way, then yeah I guess, though allowing everyone to JSJ means that you're able to chase units, keeping the distance fairly even.

It gives units that otherwise wouldn't have anything to do in assault, something to do.

It adds an extra tactical layer to the game, and to me makes assault much more of a useful defensive thing, as staying out in the open allows other units to surround you in less time.

And it's more cinematic

Sure, it adds another tactical layer to the game, at the expense of completely and utterly fething over assault. If an assault unit moves 12" plus run moves per turn towards a shooty unit and the shooty unit moves away 12" while shooting, the only progress that assault unit could possibly make is the run move, which could be invalidated by casualties from shooting in the first place. It adds an incredibly situational boon to assault units, who can already close in during the assault phase since that's what charges are for, while giving shooting units the ability to delay close combat by another two turns. It simply isn't a good idea in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

Fair play, I hadn't thought of it from that perspective. Gotta say too, I'm a massive fan of your brow beating approach to something where otherwise a "not so sure, because of xyz" would suffice

 kitch102 wrote:

Evileyes wrote:I think it would bury assault units. There would literally be no point in assault unit's, if shooting unit's could move out of assault range after shooting.

Maybe just a D3" or D6" move? Still gives assault units the 2D6" charge. Perhaps an assault units counter to that would be to have a 3D6" charge range... It may give the need for further sub classification of "types" of assault units though, so as I write this though I realise that doing so would negate the point of this, so maybe it's best left off.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 kitch102 wrote:
If you look at it that way, then yeah I guess, though allowing everyone to JSJ means that you're able to chase units, keeping the distance fairly even.

It gives units that otherwise wouldn't have anything to do in assault, something to do.

It adds an extra tactical layer to the game, and to me makes assault much more of a useful defensive thing, as staying out in the open allows other units to surround you in less time.

And it's more cinematic

Sure, it adds another tactical layer to the game, at the expense of completely and utterly fething over assault. If an assault unit moves 12" plus run moves per turn towards a shooty unit and the shooty unit moves away 12" while shooting, the only progress that assault unit could possibly make is the run move, which could be invalidated by casualties from shooting in the first place. It adds an incredibly situational boon to assault units, who can already close in during the assault phase since that's what charges are for, while giving shooting units the ability to delay close combat by another two turns. It simply isn't a good idea in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

Fair play, I hadn't thought of it from that perspective. Gotta say too, I'm a massive fan of your brow beating approach to something where otherwise a "not so sure, because of xyz" would suffice

Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure!

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 kitch102 wrote:

Evileyes wrote:I think it would bury assault units. There would literally be no point in assault unit's, if shooting unit's could move out of assault range after shooting.

Maybe just a D3" or D6" move? Still gives assault units the 2D6" charge. Perhaps an assault units counter to that would be to have a 3D6" charge range... It may give the need for further sub classification of "types" of assault units though, so as I write this though I realise that doing so would negate the point of this, so maybe it's best left off.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 kitch102 wrote:
If you look at it that way, then yeah I guess, though allowing everyone to JSJ means that you're able to chase units, keeping the distance fairly even.

It gives units that otherwise wouldn't have anything to do in assault, something to do.

It adds an extra tactical layer to the game, and to me makes assault much more of a useful defensive thing, as staying out in the open allows other units to surround you in less time.

And it's more cinematic

Sure, it adds another tactical layer to the game, at the expense of completely and utterly fething over assault. If an assault unit moves 12" plus run moves per turn towards a shooty unit and the shooty unit moves away 12" while shooting, the only progress that assault unit could possibly make is the run move, which could be invalidated by casualties from shooting in the first place. It adds an incredibly situational boon to assault units, who can already close in during the assault phase since that's what charges are for, while giving shooting units the ability to delay close combat by another two turns. It simply isn't a good idea in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

Fair play, I hadn't thought of it from that perspective. Gotta say too, I'm a massive fan of your brow beating approach to something where otherwise a "not so sure, because of xyz" would suffice

Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure!

Why stop at nukes?

Cyclonic torpedoes would be even more thorough.

I'm a huge fan of assault and hate the shootiness of this edition. But personally I'd have no problem with some small free movement one could get if you didn't assault or fire rapid fire or heavy weapons etc in the shooting phase. While most people are gaking on this idea (and probably for good reason), I think maybe it could work in a limited form.

If a unit does not assault, and did not rapid fire/fire heavy weapons in the shooting phase, it can move 3" in any direction. Assault units can run best of two 1d6 rolls (or worst of 2d6 through terrain) in the shooting phase and still charge as usual in the following assault phase. Maybe even give them hammer of wrath... but I'm getting ahead of myself there.

So essentially, give up either or both phases for extra movement. I would however make sure assault had *more* extra movement - they're just running forward the whole time while shooters have to stop to fire (despite what Hollywood might want you to believe)

Yeah, cause, feth the close combat armies. The new edition already fethed us over, now we can do away with it entirely! I guess if your goal was to make the game even more Space Marine centric, this would be a great idea. Hell, I already hate that half of tourneys seem to be majority Space Marine.

I'd only be okay with this if Orks, Tyranids, etc., got immediate new codices that optimized them for this supposed rule change and you can bet that would never happen.

Any move still causes issue, especially with random assault distances.

Sorry, it's a boost to shooting units, and a nerf to assault units, which don't need any more nerfing. 3", 1d3, or normal move, the concept is the same, the scale is the only thing different. And frankly, there is simply no need for it. "Because it sounds cool" is almost never a good idea for a rule, and that's what your reasoning on this one is boiling down to.

 Maurepas wrote:
Yeah, cause, feth the close combat armies. The new edition already fethed us over, now we can do away with it entirely! I guess if your goal was to make the game even more Space Marine centric, this would be a great idea. Hell, I already hate that half of tourneys seem to be majority Space Marine.

I'd only be okay with this if Orks, Tyranids, etc., got immediate new codices that optimized them for this supposed rule change and you can bet that would never happen.

Yes, making Tau and Eldar better totally buffs Space Marines, and nerfing Blood Angels and Black Templars even more totally buffs Space Marines. Xenos armies are totally the only assault-centric armies in the game.

Actually, you dead wrong there.

I play a shooty Dark Eldar army. I get wiped by my opponents Tau on most occasions, and overwatch frequently sees the best of me should I attempt to get in to cc.

The way around this for me is to give my units extra movement to avoid return fire - if it gets half of them out of los or whatever then it's done its job.

"Because it sounds cool" is idiotic, I actually see this as being something that could work given the proper testing and - as has been pointed out - boosts to assault units.

Am I correct to say that you proposed this change because you're struggling against Tau with your shooty DE? May I ask how is making shooting even better gonna make it easier when Tau is clearly the shootier army out there? Why not just ask all those DE who aren't struggling against Tau for what they do instead? I'm certainly not one of them, but there are plenty out there. Why try to come up with a homebrew rule to better the situation instead of... hmm... becoming a better tactician?

I honestly can't see how this could be a boost to assault unit, unless you're also proposing what Dakkamite has said about run and assault...

Let's say run is the only thing that allows an assault unit to shorten the distance, then how many turn do you think it will take for them to actually make it into combat? Because remember, no one can run and assault this ed... Some units are already struggling to keep up with all the assault direct/indirect nerf this ed, and you want to make that worse?

Kitch, I simply still do not see a need for this rule change, or how it will improve the game. It's a buff to the survivability of shooty units. Playtest it a few times against different armies and see how it goes, and get back to us with BatReps. That is really the only way you're going to be able to see its ramifications, and adequately explain them.

You yourself talked about it making the game more cinematic, which is a "this sounds cool" reason, sorry man. Your idea also started out of movies, and then changing that movie logic to real life, and we all know that real life logic does not translate to 40k well. I've yet to see solid reasoning as to how this benefits things, most glaringly a lack of a way to compensate assault based units. You asked for thoughts, if you're just going to reject them, why post?

Earlier you also said it hampers your opponents shooting...It hampers yours too. Making the game take longer than it already does, as both people pop out to shoot, then pop back behind cover or LOS blocking terrain. Assaulting units get shredded before they get there, every shooting unit chills behind terrain, and you stalemate. Honestly I see this making hordes a requirement to close distance more than anything else, as they have to survive closing the gap while there is almost no attrition among shooting units.

Lastly, you seriously appear to be approaching this from a "I'm going to do it, but my opponent won't" mindset, based on you facing Tau and having issues with their shooting, as well as my above point.

Seriously, this was a thought that came up out of the blue - I asked for thoughts to review the idea and I haven't rejected a single one.

Reeeeally think people need to chill out here: folks have ideas and they won't always be good ones. Quite why people can't stop at saying "it won't work because" is beyond me.

One final thought I had tonight on this was to have it as an optional replacement for overwatch, so it'd work in an assault units favour. Just remember guys, it was a thought, that's it, at no point have I said that I write the rules for games workshop and this is what I'll be implementing in the next faq or game edition!

Peace.

OP has had feedback--going to close per OP request...