Switch Theme:

A hypothetical alternative to capping Reserves: rework Overwatch  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
Author Message

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.

Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut

Edit: Did a few additional tweaks.

8th edition Reserve Rules mean that "null" armies are effectively illegal for matched play. While this means that certain armies (the dreaded Warp Spider Army of Doom) are just illegal, this also hoses anyone that wants to do a "from the skies" or any "null" army, be it Farsight Tau, Elysians, Black Legion Spearheads, etc. Add the fact that you need to have a special rule to be explicitly allowed to reserve on top of this.

The problem with this solution is that rather than creating core rules to develop a viable counter, it simply takes away an option altogether. ("Dear Games Workshop, Please nerf Paper. Scissors are fine. Signed, Rock."). It's this same mentality that leads to debacles like the MC02 Wargame Challenge, where nobody wins the game in the long run.

Given that 7th edition also has the issue that assault is either "go big or go home" (meaning either a null-melee army like Genestealer Cults/Death Guard Raptor Talons, or a Cabalstar/Barkbarkstar/etc), why not kill several birds with one stone?

Let's merge Interceptor and Overwatch into a single mechanic:

Any unit in 40k can Overwatch unless specifically noted otherwise. A unit that forfeits shooting, running/flat-outing, or charging may enter Overwatch; Overwatch lasts until the start of your next turn if it's otherwise unused.

During the opponent's turn (meaning Overwatch attacks cannot trigger counter-Overwatch attacks), when an enemy unit wishes to shoot, charge, or manifest a Malediction/Witchfire, the Overwatching unit may immediately interrupt the opponent's game turn to shoot that, provided the enemy unit either:

A) Is within 12" of the Overwatching unit.
B) Is targeting or would otherwise affect either the Overwatching unit, or a friendly unit within 6" of the Overwatching Unit. (This means even non-targeted powers like Beams and Novas would trigger Overwatch.

Overwatch is resolved at -1 BS to a minimum of BS 1, and is based on the movement you took in your previous turn. Flamers are treated as normal, or they have the option to perform Wall of Death against units charging the Overwatching Unit, which is modified as follows:
-Wall of Death does D6 hits, but may only remove models within 12" of the flamer.

Any abilities dealing with Interceptor, improved Overwatch BS, Grim Resolve, Supporting Fire, etc, are replaced with the following USR:

Sentinel: Ignore the -1 BS penalty to Overwatch.

I feel the system is simple enough (more streamlined than 2e's "overwatch past the blind grenade" stalemates that could occur) and promotes combined arms support. Plus, there are some cute tricks that you can still do with it that could be promoted, like conga-lining a Guard blob up the field, with Wyverns on overwatch to protect the advance as an abstraction of rolling barrage tactics 101 (Note: This could technically also be done with a Barkbarkstar, but that's another issue for another "alternative rule proposal").

Add in an extra footnote that says that Warp Spiders cannot Flickerjump during the Eldar player's turn to round it off.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2017/05/20 19:44:05

Made in us
Witch Hunter Undercover in a Cult

 MagicJuggler wrote:
...Add in an extra footnote that says that Warp Spiders cannot Flickerjump during the Eldar player's turn to round it off.

Or just...you know...drop Flickerjump? This may be my personal bias against unit-specific special rules that do something completely and utterly unrelated to anything anyone else does that requires alterations to the basic function of the game talking (you know, when you make a core rules change and have to add a footnote "...and this unit-specific special rule interacts with this change in this way..."?), but I really don't like Flickerjump.

Victoria est autem vita.  
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut

Play narrative .... the end
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut

I tweaked the rules a little more, to deal with a few edgecases:
-Overwatch attacks only occur during the opponent's turn. No Overwatching, then triggering an enemy overwatch which subsequently triggers your own overwatch.
-Overwatch has a -1 BS penalty rather than being snapshot or flat BS. Sentinel removes this penalty.
-Overwatch can trigger if an attack would initially affect a unit near the Overwatching unit, even if that unit wasn't the target. This means that Beams will trigger Overwatch despite not actually targeting a unit.
-Flamers have the option to Wall of Death, modified accordingly.
Made in us
Witch Hunter Undercover in a Cult

gungo wrote:
Play narrative .... the end

...Oh, no, obviously we all need to go home and stop thinking up any homebrew content because we've all overlooked the possibility of playing without rules. How enlightening. You've opened all our eyes to the utter pointlessness of trying to avoid quick, absolute "I-win-because-the-writers-made-my-stuff-better" games.

What, exactly, do you think Proposed Rules is for? How, exactly, do you think telling someone to "play narrative" is going to give them any idea of what their narrative-game scenario-specific rules should be, let alone people who are trying to construct something for general use?

Victoria est autem vita.  
Made in nz
Regular Dakkanaut

I reckon this could work...... providing overwatch is going to work how i think it is

What im getting at is that they were saying how you can multiple overwatch. I reckon what they'll do to balance it is that for every overwatch atk you make you get a -1 modifier which stacks. This makes sense as overwatch is the equivalent of firing blindly into the enemy.

If this is implemented into this 'overwatch' system. Then I would see that this could be a well balanced mechanic.

side note: i would make USR or rules that work with overwatch,interceptor ect. work as an initial +1 modifier.

This way the first shot will be ignored in terms of penalties but continuing to fire will still incur the penalty of blind suppressing fire into the enemy

That's my two cents
Made in us
Huge Hierodule

I recently saw the rules for overwatch from SW:A. I would lift the rules strait from there.

A unit that does nothing on it's turn can enter over watch. (No moving, no running, no shooting, nothing. It's entire turn is entering overwatch) If it takes you a turn to get into a building then the next turn you can enter overwatch.

All units deployed at the beginning of the game start the game on overwatch.

A unit on overwatch may interrupt an opponents turn to make a shooting attack against any enemy unit that enters within range of it's guns. It's simple, effective, and requires no exceptions or modifications.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/24 20:06:31

Made in us
Skilled SDF-1 Pin-Point Barrier Jockey


There needs to be some stipulation on it that makes it inferior to attacking in your turn, or you run into the 2E issue of high-noon stand-offs where both armies just wait for the other one to walk into range.

If there was either a reduced range, facing limitation (as in SW) and/or BS penalty (and Tau couldn't negate it with marker lights), it's be a mechanic I'd be happy to see return to the game.

It never ends well 
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut

 Stormonu wrote:
There needs to be some stipulation on it that makes it inferior to attacking in your turn, or you run into the 2E issue of high-noon stand-offs where both armies just wait for the other one to walk into range.

If there was either a reduced range, facing limitation (as in SW) and/or BS penalty (and Tau couldn't negate it with marker lights), it's be a mechanic I'd be happy to see return to the game.

In 2nd, the main restriction was -1 BS but it let you interrupt your foe anytime during movement (including when your opponent was moving from one cover piece to another). Thus, Overwatch really wasn't a drawback except on the most crowded of maps! Add to the fact that you had facings, could target multiple units, etc, and the mechanic was both a bit clunky *and* it did promote said standoffs.

I kept the BS penalty bit but even for stuff that ignores this, I feel the proposal I wrote should work for several reasons:
-Overwatch triggers off attacks, rather than movement. Thus, you can still advance from cover to cover as needed and you don't have to pause the game to discuss "middle of movement" overwatch.
-The rules are for 3rd/7th, where "one unit shoots at one unit". I might contemplate a "cannot overwatch" clause for Super-heavies though, due to their cumbersome nature.
-If the enemy isn't attempting to Overwatch within 12", you can only cover friendly units within 6" of your Overwatching unit. While you "can" theoretically game the system by running a lot of small artillery pieces in support of Guardblob or a Green Tide, those armies could use the help. More MSU-ish armies won't benefit as much by contrast (though running a few Hellhounds/Banewolves alongside your Russes may have a practical purpose now).
-You may still be able to "beat" overwatch with the right timing of orders. As an (admittedly abstract example), say you have a unit full of Meltavets that wants to unload and deal with an enemy Russ, but there's an enemy Hellhound on Overwatch within 6" of it. If you can "shake it" first with the Chimera (or another vehicle), you're in business. Alternately, you can still attempt to overwhelm a defensive setup.
-It potentially levels the playing field against Tau and Eldar. Not only would Overwatch protect against move-attack-move shenanigans but the rules as worded prevent units from doing ANY other actions for the turn once they enter Overwatch (aka, no "move-overwatch-move" shenanigans).

There are certain aspects of the rule that do bother me, that I imagine a few tweaks can sort out:
-The rules benefit all large units equally no matter what, due to the ability to daisy-chain nearby overwatchers. While this is fluffy for Guardblobs/etc, it's less so for a Barkbarkstar. (Solition: Put the Barkbarkstar to sleep).
-Defender Fires First may be a bit too good in some situations, especially when it comes to shooting without LOS. One thing I've contemplated is a "counter-battery clause", which states "Defender Fires first if it can trace Line of Sight to its target" or so.
-"No overwatch" should be case by case. I imagine most "no overwatch" effects in the game now should translate to "cannot overwatch vs charging enemies" or so. While driving up to a Guard gunline with a Dirge Caster Rhino is funny, plopping a Darkshroud next to a bunch of artillery would be less so. If any units should be immune to "return fire" Overwatch, it should be the really sneaky stuff, like Stealth Suits, Rangers, etc.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/05/26 18:09:08

Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: