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.

So, when a unit wins a combat in any assault phase the player has the choice to a) consolidate as is now b) roll a d6+I and consolidate into an enemy unit. the enemy would get to fire overwatch as normal even if it has already fired overwatch previously as long as it is not already locked in combat. Combat is fought in the next players turn as if they were already engaged.

so my cousin and i have been talking and he thinks this could very potentially fix a lot of melee armies / assault in general. also assaulting from outflank as well as from walking on but thats another topic.

What do you guys think? is it viable?

That wouldn't be too bad, no. I used to hate the idea of consolidating into combat, but that was when it was pitched as "keep on fighting until you lose", where one unit of Vanguard Veterans could annihilate a whole Tau gunline in one assault phase, say. If you have to wait until next assault phase to fight, then it's probably fine.

Consolidate into an enemy unit. .

This was a rule a long time ago. I played fantasy in that time and no 40k and I liked it there it added an extra layer of tactics by placing units behind units etc. But 40k is and was an other game with way more shooting armies, and I can imagine that shooting armies don't like it. So I don't have any experience with it, but most veterans I talked with seem to agree that it is a good thing that that rule is gone.

The main problem of those old days are still there.
Close Combats ending in the enemy phase prevent shooting at the attacker.

together with this rule, some players could have one melee unit jump from combat to combat killing the whole gun line without a chance to being shot at.

the problem now is that melee units don't have an equivalent to the overwatch rule.

 kodos wrote:
The main problem of those old days are still there.
Close Combats ending in the enemy phase prevent shooting at the attacker.

together with this rule, some players could have one melee unit jump from combat to combat killing the whole gun line without a chance to being shot at.

the problem now is that melee units don't have an equivalent to the overwatch rule.

Right, thats the point though. A quick dedicated melee unit isnt going to stand in the open and volunteer to die. Also if youre worried about them jumping from squad to squad then you need to break up your gunline a bit.you still get overwatch when they consolidate into another squad.

I wouldnt be surprised to see all the shooty army players scream its too OP or game breaking, but i think it just makes melee more viable in general, which would shake up any gunline mindset for sure.

 Wolfnid420 wrote:

 kodos wrote:
The main problem of those old days are still there.
Close Combats ending in the enemy phase prevent shooting at the attacker.

together with this rule, some players could have one melee unit jump from combat to combat killing the whole gun line without a chance to being shot at.

the problem now is that melee units don't have an equivalent to the overwatch rule.

Right, thats the point though. A quick dedicated melee unit isnt going to stand in the open and volunteer to die. Also if youre worried about them jumping from squad to squad then you need to break up your gunline a bit.you still get overwatch when they consolidate into another squad.

I wouldnt be surprised to see all the shooty army players scream its too OP or game breaking, but i think it just makes melee more viable in general, which would shake up any gunline mindset for sure.

If you are worried about assault, kill the enemy before he gets to you

The idea should be to change assault to something viable without getting in the same problems like GW did years ago.

First would be to let units leave combat if they want to (they get a free strike or attack reaction if they do so but the should be able to do it)
Next is that melee units get a counter-attack option similar to overwatch (they should be able to charge enemy’s who are dancing around 1 inch away, shooting them instead of getting shot twice because in the next turn they get overwatch fire if the attack).
Last part would be that melee units get a small additional movement if they destroyed an enemy unit which can be a charge if an enemy is in range.

The only way I can see to fix assault at this point is to remove it entirely.

The biggest, current, problem with assault units is that they are still paying the cost for previous editions assault phase strengths. All assault units are overpriced because of the rules changes that have not been accounted for in the unit costs. Yes a power fist is powerful, but is it really worth more than a Lascannon now?

A lascannon can only shoot once and will be twin-linked at best.

A powerfist can have far more than one attack.

 Bobthehero wrote:
A lascannon can only shoot once and will be twin-linked at best.

A powerfist can have far more than one attack.

The Lascannon also has almost 4 times the range counting the charge distance, and an average of 1 higher strength point. and the same AP. It also doesn't incur an initiative penalty. It is also effective starting on turn one, unless you placed your army poorly or your opponent placed theirs very well. The fist is only truly effective after the first turn, and usually later than that.

Yes they are both good weapons, but the Lascannon is better, and cheaper, than the Power fist.

To bring a power fist to a lascannon fight.

Martel732 wrote:
The only way I can see to fix assault at this point is to remove it entirely.

Great suggestion. Let's take half the game out so we can neuter nearly every single army that isnt Tau

I actually like that idea.

Old consolidate rules were broken. A 30man blob of boyz could take forever to finish a single assault phase because they just bounced between units with no reprimand against it.

This rule lets them consolidate into another unit but has the risk of Overwatch and they dont immediately start swinging. Especially helps units that are way too easy to clean off the board with shooting (slugga boyz, flayed ones, genestealers, etc)

 Bobthehero wrote:
A lascannon can only shoot once and will be twin-linked at best.

A powerfist can have far more than one attack.

once each turn. That adds up considering its range allows it to virtually always fire. That's 5-7 shots.
The powerfists guy needs to be a real go-getter scrapper to get more than 5-7 swings in a game. Some vet sarge isn't pulling that off. You need someone heavy like a captain or a named guy.

(Which brings up the age-old issue of why on earth a fist for a NOT-veteran sarge costs the same as one for chapter master Biggie "beatstick" McLargehuge.)

 Vineheart01 wrote:
I actually like that idea.

Old consolidate rules were broken. A 30man blob of boyz could take forever to finish a single assault phase because they just bounced between units with no reprimand against it.

This rule lets them consolidate into another unit but has the risk of Overwatch and they dont immediately start swinging. Especially helps units that are way too easy to clean off the board with shooting (slugga boyz, flayed ones, genestealers, etc)

What if everytime they consolidated, the enemy would get +1 BS until they hit their max at which point they could fire blast weapons and flamer templates

Make it so you can hit on 2's and 6's. This means models like Lilleth and the Solitaire are the close combat beasts who could stand there and prod a tau in the face/nose/slit while they flail madly without being able to do anything about it, as opposed to missing a third of the time and being hit a third of the time.

Maybe limit the number of consolidate charges to half the initiatve rounded up. Use the inititiative of an ic or unique character attached to the unit if the ic/uc has higher intiative, otherwise use average intiative.

Id say just make the consolidation attempt shorter and make it disordered so you dont gain to many bonuses.

Thinking of how tired some folks might be hacking away then running head long into another unit so quickly.

Sounds good so far. What I would suggest is a single d6 instead of +I, and followed by overwatch if the unit HASN'T overwatch. so even my tau units cannot keep overwatching. But that means supporting fire will be extended due to other units joining in from further distances. There will also be no charge bonus, and the assault will start next player turn.

Taffy17 wrote:
Make it so you can hit on 2's and 6's. This means models like Lilleth and the Solitaire are the close combat beasts who could stand there and prod a tau in the face/nose/slit while they flail madly without being able to do anything about it, as opposed to missing a third of the time and being hit a third of the time.

Which is fluffy, but mostly serves to turn battles that are already walk-overs into even bigger walk-overs. Those Fire Warriors or Stealth Suits are already going to get swept.

WS should probably have more impact, but mostly high WS versus medium WS, where it doesn't matter much right now. Super-stomping the guys who already get stomped is fun, but mostly doesn't solve the problem.