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've seen this idea pop up a few other places, but never really discussed outside of a few content nods. Switching from the I-go-you-go turn sequence, to a more interleaved parallel or Phase based sequence.
To me, this literally seems as simple as:

Player 1 Movement
Player 2 Movement

Player 1 Psychic
Player 2 Psychic

Player 1 Shooting
Player 2 Shooting

Player 1 Assault
Player 2 Assault

I was working on a unit-activation based alternating sequence rule-set a while ago, and was running into a lot of issues with timing (when to use "start of phase" rules, when to use psychics, when to resolve combat, etc etc), but this Phased system seems to sidestep all that, and fit into the existing rules without much issue or reinterpretation.
Obviously the benefits of this sequence are that it makes the game a lot more tactical and reactionary, cutting down on alpha-strike power, and keeps both players more involved in the game. The main benefit I think comes in just being able to walk up to a friendly pickup game and asking "Do you want to try out a Phased turn sequence? I move, you move, I shoot, you shoot, etc etc" without having to sit down and explain a bunch of finicky house rules.

So, I'm asking those smarter than myself, does this style of turn sequence have any inherent rules contradictions or specific codex issues that would crop up? I can't think of any off the top of my head, as it still uses the same basic turn structures, just at difference times. Would you as a player be open to using this sequence in a friendly game? What are some pros and cons that you can see?

I look forward to trying it out myself soon, and if any of you guys have had experience with a similar ruleset, I'd love to hear your impressions.

Well, it does a lot less to negate the advantage of getting to go first than unit-by-unit activation. One player still gets to kill the enemy before the other does. It's still better than the current system in that respect though.

Assault units would seem to be even more prone to getting shot up than before. You pretty much have to take a round of shooting at less than 12" range before you get stuck in.

It buffs lots of psychic powers, notably any defensive blessings and any witchfire attacks.

Defensive blessing are always going to be in place by the time people start shooting. That gets rid of one of the major flaws in builds which rely on them. Given that the single most 'overpowered' power in the game right now seems to be Invisibility and a lot of other defensive blessings are really good, that's a big deal.

Witchfire is more useful because it always lets you hit the enemy before they get a shooting phase. However, since witchfire powers tend to be short-ranged and weak it's a lot less of a problem than the defensive blessings.

Move the assaults to the movement phase.

A successful charge means that the unit has prevented someone from shooting, a failed one means that they are about to get shot in the face.

Assault weapons fired at -1BS before movement, provided that you are charging. Otherwise fired normally.