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.

Or put it into 40k so they can 'enjoy' it with us

But more seriously, there are a good number of people who like or don't mind it. While I really hate it myself I value compromise. Take it out of matched play, replace with 'deploy first, go first' and leave it in for open & narrative.

Double turn could be a thing in some scenarios, but I also really hate it and would rather it not be in every single one of the games I play.

But more seriously, there are a good number of people who like or don't mind it

I don't think the number of people who genuinely love it is high enough to protest if it'd be removed from Matched Play. It can happily live it's days in Open....

Double turn is hit or miss, either you love it or hate it (usually love it when it helps you and hate when it hurts you xD). It's an interesting rule, I'll give them that.

I've resorted to designing my lists around being few enough drops to win turn choice, choosing second, then never taking the double. I have more fun losing without than I do winning with.

Wayniac wrote:
Double turn is hit or miss, either you love it or hate it (usually love it when it helps you and hate when it hurts you xD). It's an interesting rule, I'll give them that.

And in-between - I.E. when I'm not playing a game - I don't care about it either way.

Down at the shop we use it/don't use it depending upon who's playing.
Some hate it - when two players who hate it play, game reverts to IGOUGO.
Some like it - if both players are in this category then the rule stands.
When people with differing opinions on it play they roll off to see if it'll be used.

I hate double turn even when I have it, just because You can just slaughter people if they been rolling bad. I say 40k and AOS should adobt Kill team. You move, enemy move, You shoot, enemy shoot, and so on each phase. It be more fun to because then you move around to who moved. and what not. You roll to get who moves what unit first. It be more fun battles too I think

 Xfrawg wrote:
I hate double turn even when I have it, just because You can just slaughter people if they been rolling bad. I say 40k and AOS should adobt Kill team. You move, enemy move, You shoot, enemy shoot, and so on each phase. It be more fun to because then you move around to who moved. and what not. You roll to get who moves what unit first. It be more fun battles too I think

That's how Lord of the Rings has worked for 20 years

Thats how a lot of games work these days. Either alternating phases or fullsale alternate activation of units.

It makes the game tons more interactive and you don't stand there for an hour taking a turn (or in aos' case sometimes two whole turns) standing there doing nothing but removing models.

It lessens the alpha strike shenanigans since your opponent can respond immediately to you launching units into his face turn 1.

It makes list building lesser because you can't pile on to your opponent in one (or in AOS' case, two) go's while they stand there doing nothing.

I used in 40k and AOS for years (we did both alternating phases and wholesale alternating units), and it was the only house rule that had overwhelmingly positive comments in an area where house rules are generally seen as evil and nefarious. Try it for yourself and see.

I'm definitely in favor of alternate activations, AoS already does it with melee, there's nothing that would prevent it from applying to other phases.

When 8th 40k was first being talked about they hyped up the command point system.... well many other games has a pseudo alternating actions phase using CP's (example for those that don't know, you basically have a list of things you can do per turn, somethings happen before others some happens in any order, but each action takes 1 CP, so you get X actions a turn, maybe its move 10 units, maybe its move some and shoot some, etc..)

I was very hyped until i saw it was just a stupid way to use rules we always used before but now i need a counter to say how many times i can use them and they are no longer on their warscroll/datasheets.

But going to the current topic, i always like that way of play the most out of all the systems i have played, you still get your full turn, but it is very limited and not all units may even get to do something, it forces hard choices, normally you got around 10 actions, but had the possibility to take 100+ actions. There were also a couple actions if you saved them you could use during your opponents turn (like there version of overwatch), or some can be used in both turns like going to ground (aka, duck and cover, normally makes you harder to hit like snap shots against you)


Some of the actions were: (using wrong terms to help understand more)
-Move/Run/March
-Shoot/Aim/Overwatch
-Fallback
-Stand up/Regroup
-Go to cover/ground
-Supporting fire
-Suppressive fire
-Leaders abilities (normally let a unit regroup+another action, or just 2 actions)

So for 40k/AoS say you get 5 actions per 500pts and we are playing 500pt game, each with 2 heroes 2 battalion and 1 unit. I might use 2 in the hero phase to buff a unit, then move 2 units, and finally shoot with the last unit. Then my opponent goes, he spends 3 to move 3 units, 2 of those units gets into melee range then he spends 2 to have them fight, and thats it. Each had to sacrifice a unit or more actions to make other units more viable at the time.

This normally works better with games that has a larger rules system, the less rules for options (like fire suppression shots to force units to spend multi CP to get an action, or having true going to ground for cover to limited damage).

Cronch wrote:
I'm definitely in favor of alternate activations, AoS already does it with melee, there's nothing that would prevent it from applying to other phases.

You and me both. I think alternative actions would completely revolutionise the game for the better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


This idea sounds fantastic too. Real tactical decisions to be made.

If they got rid of double turn and put an alternating phase or full actions in, I'd definitely reconsider playing again as that is one of the things that I really have no fun with.

After that it would just be restraining free summoning and I think that the gross imbalance being the last of my issues would be more tolerable.

I think the double turn was meant to provide a sort of random element to the game, which I mean it does. Just I think it's TOO devastating to get an entire turn given how Warhammer plays. It's not so much the double turn itself but how getting an entire turn where your opponent can't do much of anything but sit and take your attacks is too much with the power of armies.

I don't see it going anywhere though. The design team and enough competitive players seem to enjoy it for what it adds that I can't see them dropping it, although I wouldn't mind seeing it made an optional rule so people/TOs can decide themselves if it gets used or not. Sort of like the realm rules which everyone craps on despite GW outright saying they are built into the balance of the game.

Its part of the philosophy that game mastery should not be heavy as that runs off most of your players, and that the game should be light enough for even beginner players to feel like they are doing well.

Extreme random elements and things like double turn allow for anyone to beat anyone (in theory), and mastery turns from tabletop tactics to listbuilding around the randomness and in AOS trying to get as few drops as possible to control who gets the double turn first since its so heavy handed and influential.

I definitely think the deployment steps need to be changed. Maybe have them change per battleplan similar to how some 40k missions are. Right now it's too much trying to game "few drops" if you can.

At a bare minimum, it should have the +1 to the roll instead of picking.

Wargames take too much time to set up and organise for my game to be decided by lolrandom rules.
Alternating activation solves so many problems. First turn advantage is solved. Game rounds are more interactive. It adds an extra layer of choice into what you actually do on the battlefield, rather than choice at a list building level.
It helps to even out swingyness due to luck by limiting the amount of damage that can be done in one action step.

And it really is not that complicated. For beginners, it is actually a bit easier, as they do not have to think about their entire army at once, just pick a unit, use it and learn what it does, then watch my opponent do the same, move to the next unit. It is a lot less to take in than "Now, remember all these different rules and statistics for your entire army and GO!"

I genuinely do not understand why GW have not moved to alternating activations already. Especially given how easy it would be in the current version of the rules.

Wayniac wrote:
I definitely think the deployment steps need to be changed. Maybe have them change per battleplan similar to how some 40k missions are. Right now it's too much trying to game "few drops" if you can.

At a bare minimum, it should have the +1 to the roll instead of picking.

My CoS list is 15 drops and i don't care if i go first or 2nd. Also how i play (and how many others are starting to play) my BoC army, sure its a 1 drop, but i don't care if i go first or second, i 'll choose 1st or second only dependent on the missions and not a double turn.

The problem is most armies/list don't have that luxury, armies like DoK, BoK and IDK are god at taking double turns but also can withstand them and even benefit from them at times, but then you get some like Goblins, NH, Sylvaneth, that just are devastated for getting double turned on.

Nostalgia? The fact they like being able to do stuff without repercussion? I'm not sure. I think the best way I've seen to do that is how Bolt Action works (I'm not sure if their fantasy game does it. Auticus I know you play it, how does it work there?) with the command dice thing you draw, so you might get lucky and get to activate multiple units, but then you can't react to your opponent or it might go alternating.

Warlords of Ehrewon (the fantasy version by Warlord Games) uses the same structure, its dice out of a bag and you give the order to a unit and then draw the next dice blindly out of the bag.

Middle Earth is alt activation of phases.

Conquest: The Last Argument of Kings is pure alt activation, where you go through your unit deck and set the order you wish to activate and then when the turn starts, whoever has initiative activates the first unit all the way, then the opposing player activates their next unit.

There is a supremacy ability of the spires (one time use only) that lets them activate three units at once if you take the right warlord.

I've got two battle reports in my youtube channel now that show how that works (in the sig).

Age of Fantasy is just alternating activation with no spice added and it is very simple to play and teach to new players. People are used to the idea of taking turns and taking turns per unit rather than per army is not that confusing.

I don't think its confusing at all. It does lessen list building's importance though and I think if GW went full blown alt activation they would take a lot of flak for that.

I have heard the counter argument many times that it is more confusing, but I agree with you. I wonder if you are right about them not wanting to reduce the impact of list building.

 Da Boss wrote:
Age of Fantasy is just alternating activation with no spice added and it is very simple to play and teach to new players. People are used to the idea of taking turns and taking turns per unit rather than per army is not that confusing.

To be fair, Age of Fantasy and Grimdark future are light-years better than AoS and 40k. Their designer better understands how to juggle theme and balance than anyone GW in the last ten years. I legitimately would pay $50 per book to see those rules become the next official GW ones. To think they are free, and yet so wildly underappreciated is mind boggling.

the funny thing is, that for those people who come from other games, the alternating activation is the classic IGoUGo system were GW's alternating phases is fancy new system


And GW does not want to have those fast games with a lot of player interaction
They want their main games to be slow with a lot of talking and one player acting at once

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Age of Fantasy is just alternating activation with no spice added and it is very simple to play and teach to new players. People are used to the idea of taking turns and taking turns per unit rather than per army is not that confusing.

To be fair, Age of Fantasy and Grimdark future are light-years better than AoS and 40k. Their designer better understands how to juggle theme and balance than anyone GW in the last ten years. I legitimately would pay $50 per book to see those rules become the next official GW ones. To think they are free, and yet so wildly underappreciated is mind boggling.

People flock towards systems that everyone else plays.

If you could wave a wand and say "AOS doesn't exist, only Age of Fantasy does and the AOS players play Age of Fantasy instead" you'd see its praises sung, because people gravitate towards games where everyone else is playing to maximize their investment into the hobby (which is sizable... several hundred dollars and hours of time hobbying is not light and people want to make sure they always have opponents).

 auticus wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Age of Fantasy is just alternating activation with no spice added and it is very simple to play and teach to new players. People are used to the idea of taking turns and taking turns per unit rather than per army is not that confusing.

To be fair, Age of Fantasy and Grimdark future are light-years better than AoS and 40k. Their designer better understands how to juggle theme and balance than anyone GW in the last ten years. I legitimately would pay $50 per book to see those rules become the next official GW ones. To think they are free, and yet so wildly underappreciated is mind boggling.

People flock towards systems that everyone else plays.

If you could wave a wand and say "AOS doesn't exist, only Age of Fantasy does and the AOS players play Age of Fantasy instead" you'd see its praises sung, because people gravitate towards games where everyone else is playing to maximize their investment into the hobby (which is sizable... several hundred dollars and hours of time hobbying is not light and people want to make sure they always have opponents).

What becomes funny though is when local clubs/groups don't use the better rules, third party or not. I could see the traveling competitive players wanting "official" but a group at a store really isn't beholden to using official anything as long as you remain self-contained, and if the rules are free it's even easier to just tell anyone who wants to play AOS that we use the models but not the rules, we use these free rules (or even keep copies in the store!) because they are better written. So it really would not be hard to take say Age of Fantasy and use it as the AOS rules while everyone is using AOS models. It's just inertia or the desire to not "deviate" that keeps it.

Its the comfort of knowing you are playing what everyone else is playing in the same way so you can talk about it in the same context.

The thing is even in a local store, the extended group is not tight nit. Theres usually a core who become fairly close and could use an agreed upon set of house rules. But theres always a flux of irregular or one off players coming and going too. And if your house rules are too extensive that can be a huge turnoff for new blood, which is likely detrimental to the shop.

It is also that those who decided to play something else, don't go somewhere else and advertise it

there are no events/tournaments, so no need to discuss in forums, with list building not that important there is no mathhammer done on social media

the groups just play their game and is happy
no one outside that group will ever know that they play something else