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.

Simply replace the current CC table, with the wound table.

Atm I feel that WS just has little to no efffect on the game when compared to I, A, or T, which makes stuff like Close combat assassins just very uninteresting.

Before I got into this, but still had a vague idea of how the game worked, this is how I thought CC worked.

Seems a bit off for it to be 3-5+ rather than 2-6. But I guess if GW wants to make BS 4 better than WS 4 then thats just in line with all their other rule changes

DrunkPhilisoph wrote:
Simply replace the current CC table, with the wound table.

Atm I feel that WS just has little to no efffect on the game when compared to I, A, or T, which makes stuff like Close combat assassins just very uninteresting.

That will just cause more hopeless one-sided, one-turn assaults though. And lots of situations where one guy can solo huge units without worrying about much at all.

rolls to hit are needed to see how lucky you are - i've had a large unit of harlequins charge 4 orks, thinking the orks were dead, 1 attack hit them, and failed to wound.

i think they need to rethink the attacks, it seems off that a unit with 1 higer initiative can swing several times before the other one even gets to hit. but then the game slows...

 Dakkamite wrote:
Before I got into this, but still had a vague idea of how the game worked, this is how I thought CC worked.

Seems a bit off for it to be 3-5+ rather than 2-6. But I guess if GW wants to make BS 4 better than WS 4 then thats just in line with all their other rule changes

BS4 has always been better than WS4.

Which kinda makes sense - it's a lot quicker to learn basic marksmanship than basic close-combat, even if achieving true mastery takes a long time with either.

Back in 2e, combat took forever because you had to do it two models at a time. Everything was done as 1v1 fights. Both sides rolled a number of dice equal to their Attacks characteristic and added their Weapon Skill to the highest die. Whoever got higher hit the one who got lower a number of times equal to the difference.

Ew, I've yet to hear a 2nd ed rule that I actually liked.

 Dakkamite wrote:
Ew, I've yet to hear a 2nd ed rule that I actually liked.

Believe it or not but that is very similar to how the CC works in Hobbit and LoTR

some bloke wrote:

i think they need to rethink the attacks, it seems off that a unit with 1 higer initiative can swing several times before the other one even gets to hit. but then the game slows...

This got me thinking...
What if your Ini characteristic was simply where your attacks STARTED? So a Harlie with 3 attacks and I6 would do one at I6, one at I5, one at I4. Also, a model would never make attacks at a value equal to or lower than half its initiative. So a DP at I8 with 6 attacks would only make attacks at Steps 8-5, with additional attacks piling onto Initiative steps. He would get 2 at I8, 2 at I7, 1 at I6, 1 at I5. If the DP had 13 attacks, for example....4 at I8, 3 at I7-5. And if the Harlie had four attacks, it'd get 2 at I6, 1 at I5-4.
This is certainly more complicated...but it does give other models a chance to at least swing.

@ Elric Greywolf - An interesting thought, but yes I think it would slow things down quite a bit. It also would make things a bit strange when that charging power fist goes at the end and gets 2-4 swings in a row. Worth further thought though.

BTW, my friends and I usually play in Wellington CO, neighbor!