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.

Proposed Rule: No Turn 1 Reserves, T2-3 reserves may be selected to attempt to come into play. On T4 they automatically enter play. The units attempting to come in must be declared prior to any die rolls. After the 1st die roll no further units may be selected that were not previously declared. On a 4+ they succeed and enter as normal.

New Universal Warlord traits selectable:
Master Strategist- Player may add or subtract 1 to his die roll when rolling for reserves.
Master of Deceit- Player may subtract 1 from his opponent's reserve die rolls.

New Universal Stratagem:
1 CP: Dug In- At the beginning of the 1st battle round but before the 1st turn begins, both players may select a unit to receive +1 to its cover save. If the unit moves from it's current position it then loses the ability. It may shoot and declare charges as normal. The ability lasts until the start of the next battle round. This stratagem may be used any number of times.


Hypothesis: Reliability of reserves decreases, the power of an Alpha Strike list decreases. Heavy reliance on reserves may favor one of the new WLTs. Units will tend to trickle in more throughout the match meaning the games result will not be clear until around T3. 1st turn advantage will decrease due to the 2nd turn player having spammable defensive options. 1st turn player has same defensive option if they do not move. Ignores cover army trait (Iron Warriors) will matter slightly more for what it's worth.

I'm in a 6 person meta and will be experimenting with these rules. So far the player that goes 1st has around an 80% victory rate from personal observation. Polite critique and questions welcome.

I feel that these rules will just make the opposite effect true. In which entrenched armies will just be way more powerful.

These rules will just make this feel like 7th all over again, reverting the meta back to shooting galleries instead of the intense action that 8th is.

This is not a great idea, cause if i wanted to play 7th edition, I would play 7th edition.


There was a reason that turn one tabling in 7th was a thing

I don't understand why so many people want less control over whether or not their army functions this particular game...

mchammadad- I could see the "Dug in Stratagem" benefiting gunline armies, it's true. I was thinking more along the lines of the IG which has too many squads to be able to blanket their guys in trenches, but a reaper star could be pretty abusive. To be fair, Reapers are already pretty abusive though. I'm not trying to change everything broken with the game, just adjust my local meta so that 1st turn does not equal auto win. Will require playtesting.

Your comments on 7th are interesting. Assault is much better in 8th to be sure, the rules are streamlined obviously, but at least with 7th the game wasn't usually decided turn 1 or 2. The changes to the cover system, ap values, and wound allocation all make 8th edition the most deadly version of 40k. It's why blanket effects like -1 to hit are so good, you mitigate 16% of the damage taken.

I will give it to you, the first 1 to 2 battle rounds in 8th are very fun. Just looking for ways to drag out the outcome of the game.

Arachnofiend- Because if both armies are always functioning at optimum efficiency then second player will always start the game with several hundred less points to fight back with.
Think about if there was a unit that could deepstrike T1 without scatter and without a chance of fail in the last edition. We know that would have been insanely overpowered. Now have the rules of the game changed drastically enough that that would not still be the case?

To whom it may concern- I did ask for feedback and appreciate it. Has anyone else noticed that barely anyone ever comes on this forum to actually agree with a rules change?

Just limit the deep strike ability. Too many unit can have it, that's the problem. Just keep the ability to a very little amount of units/characters. Like 1 unit and 1 character per faction.

mchammadad wrote:
There was a reason that turn one tabling in 7th was a thing

Don't think I have seen that happen yet on 7th ed locally. 8th ed 90% games are over after turn 1. Even if something is left it's still as good as done deal. Only cases where it's not been 1 turn game is when both sides have rolled abusmally bad.

I also feel that 1-st turn alpha strikes are too strong and decide a lot of games. It's most noticeable when you play a mellee army and go second vs a 'blob of death' grouped around buff characters. The earliest you can get up to them is turn two. And even then there might be enough cheap bauble wrap to delay you for another turn. So, by turn 2 you're likely to loose > half of your army cause the opponent has allready had 2 shooting phases at full strength and there is nothing you can do to protect your forces mitigating the incoming damage. And the game is basically decided by the "who goes first" roll.

And i'm afraid there's not really much you can do against it with the i go you go system other than lower the overall killiness. You can try to mitigate it a bit with something like 1-st turn both players get better saves or are harder to hit or something like this that prolongs the lives a bit. But it's not a real solution. The real one is to abolish the i go you go system entirely, play smaller games and lower the killiness of units in weapon stats.

This is kinda a byproduct of 8th ed in general. Its not even so much first turn, its just garunteed deep strike, and the amount of warp gakkery that can be done that breaks the game.

Besides the most powerful alpha strikes are not even from reserves its from stratagems, like alpha legion. I mean you think its bad now? Wait until the demon index drops, and i can use a stratagem for 2 CP that lets me put any daemon PL 9 or more into the warp, and i can basically deep strike him. So guess what im gonna do. Use that on mortarian, deep strike in a chaos terminator sorcerer, bring morty in right next to him, but 9 inches away from the enemy, then warp time sling shot him into combat turn one. Since morty has the key words of nurgal and daemon, i would bet dollars to donuts you can do this. You can do the same thing with magnus but minus the need for the terminator to cast warptime.

The problem is not just deep striking units, its 8th in general makes is SUPER easy to alpha strike.

Why not use dice to determine which unit goes first like in Bolt Action. I tried this and it gives more balanced effects. Of course it is only a house rule!

ordoteutonicus wrote:
Why not use dice to determine which unit goes first like in Bolt Action. I tried this and it gives more balanced effects. Of course it is only a house rule!

I don't mind bolt action rules but it adds so much more time to games.

i feel like the current reserve rule for matched play isn't strict enough to prevent an alpha strike.

Rather i would say maybe only 25% of your army can come from reserve? that's 1 unit for every 4, which means you cant really do big alpha strikes unless you spread those points out to a lot of units

mchammadad wrote:
i feel like the current reserve rule for matched play isn't strict enough to prevent an alpha strike.

Rather i would say maybe only 25% of your army can come from reserve? that's 1 unit for every 4, which means you cant really do big alpha strikes unless you spread those points out to a lot of units

You also deatory fluff armies like deathwing, or drop pods, I know no one uses drop pods but still. It's already a bitch to try and run deathwing

Yea... this would indeed destroy fluff armies

UNFORTUNATELY...... people just havent adapted to the playstyle of 8th edition. And i really cant blame them

Changing the game this much was bound to leave some people, veterans of the game especially in a sort of what to do scenario.

When you play a game for soo long with the same rules that you are farmiliar with over a long period of time, changing those core rules blindsides people, making them stumble around as they try and find a strategy that works.

The meta for 40k had been quite static for a LOONG time, and when the game changed the meta changed with it, now we are coming across strategies that would of never worked last editions but now actually are very viable and very strong strategies.

Fluff armies now actually feel somewhat like their actual fluff counterparts in the game, while oldschool 'competitive' list have actually shown that they don't really work as well as they used to.

People aren't taking the time to get a feel for the game, and instead just wish it to be like it was. Hence even this topic, alpha strikes

Remember this, For 3 editions alpha strike was just a footnote in this game, in fact the strategy was soo linear in what you could do that there was really only one reason to have any alpha strike units last editions (Target prioritization)

Now. This edition made it it's own viable strategy, and people. Whom were used to entrenched, long drawn out 7 turn objective holding shooting galleries, cant cope with the fact that a unit can now hit them whenever, wherever.

I feel that the core mechanics as they stand are actually quite solid, and the playtime for these games is rather good for casual games with friends. But in a tournament sense, i feel that people are still stuck in the mindset of old editions.

Remember, 40k never advertised itself as a competitive game, players made it that way

That's my two cents to this

 Lemane0116 wrote:
mchammadad- I could see the "Dug in Stratagem" benefiting gunline armies, it's true. I was thinking more along the lines of the IG which has too many squads to be able to blanket their guys in trenches, but a reaper star could be pretty abusive. To be fair, Reapers are already pretty abusive though. I'm not trying to change everything broken with the game, just adjust my local meta so that 1st turn does not equal auto win. Will require playtesting.

Your comments on 7th are interesting. Assault is much better in 8th to be sure, the rules are streamlined obviously, but at least with 7th the game wasn't usually decided turn 1 or 2. The changes to the cover system, ap values, and wound allocation all make 8th edition the most deadly version of 40k. It's why blanket effects like -1 to hit are so good, you mitigate 16% of the damage taken.

You are right. In 7th, most games were decided in the list building phase before ever putting a model on the table. Alpha strike is already handled in a TAC pretty efficiently by throwing 2-3 scout units 18" ahead of your forward deployed units making the area in between a "no go" area. If you aren't prepared for the Alpha strike, then you better plan to mitigate it... if you choose to do neither, well sucks for you.

mchammadad- To say that this would destroy fluff armies as if this would be the deciding factor is ludicrous. This thread is also meant to discuss the proposed rules, not personal takes on the mindset of veteran players. You may be right, perhaps my friends merely haven't adapted enough, but I am looking for ways to improve my local games survivability rate.

quickfuze- The problem with relying on scouts to prevent alpha strike is 2 fold.

1. You must win the roll off for who decides the pre-1st turn drops. If you lose that roll off, your opponent could easily decide to make you infiltrate all your units after his own. You could bypass the need for scouts by 'scouting' your own deployment zone, as in placing a few screening units at the foremost of your zone and placing your weight deeper in. So the problem lays more within the second point.
2. This is possibly a miscommunication on my part but when I say alpha strike I'm just generally lobbing in large and powerful shooting attacks that wipe several units off T1 (Oblits with Endless Cac, Dark Reapers with autarch/farseer). Scouts do nothing against these types of attacks, they're just going to shoot your good gak in the back.

Obviously LOS plays a role but as a general objective here, I am going to experiment with rules that make the 1st turn less deciding.

These rules coupled with the +1 ITC roll off for who goes 1st there should be a fair amount of uncertainty in the game. Do I hold my wraithguard in the webway (where they may arrive late) or shove them in a wave serpent? Should the Oblits start on the field so they can shoot T1 with the consequence that I may go second and they may take casualties before I get to use them?

Agree or disagree, feedback welcome, but keep it about the proposed rule please.

It's hard to go wrong with-
Observation: (ex: +1 cover save is OP!!!1)
Hypothesis: (ex: Players will spend all dere CP on dat)
Conclusion: (ex: Game is less fun cuz 1 strat to rule dem all)

Well here is the thing with this edition that no one really seems to grasp, you need screening units, elite armies suffer because guess what, your core guys are getting hit. You need to take like 300 points of BS units that stop the alpha strike, Its why in a guard list you take 3 sentinels to scout ahead, and each one create a 18" bubble that denies their deep strike.

Its not hard to counter alpha strike, people are just unwilling to take screening units to do so.

^ We do that all the time at our gaming club

In fact, even when someone does bring an alpha strike list, it gets shutdown hard cause we actually play horde like style armies, rather than old school 'elite' tournament list

Also Lemane, is it just shooting armies that do the alpha striking at your games? or is it a combination of melee and shooting?

Shooting is going to be strong in this game, regardless of rules change or not because it's ingrained into the core rules. Melee is a bit more complicated. (a guaranteed death vs a semi-guaranteed death is a heck of a difference)

Short of severely limiting reserves (Which i stated in a previous post) you wont be able to get rid of alpha striking( At least shooting Alpha striking), even if you try. But at that point the game looses one of it's new features that excite players

Short answer? Adding a rule changes the focus of where people need to look.

I say the list building actually needs to change. Even GW are changing the rules so that 'single units' spamming is slowly being phased out (With stratagems, CP's, Adding the new rule to smite,Traits). In my opinion, this is actually one of the best editions to experiment

tbh its mostly Alpha legion BS, since for some reason GW thought it would be a great idea to let rubrics, noise, plague, and bezerker marines all be alpha legion, you can pass up spending one command point to infiltrate 20 rubric marines to then walk forward and unload on them turn one, OR do the same thing with khorne bezerkers and charge turn one.

Ok, sure.

But to stay on topic I'll post the results of playtesting this weekend if anyone's interested in how the proposed rules affects gameplay. Might just drop a link to the batrep forum if I take good enough photos.

Edit- My computer was being weird, didn’t show mchammadads post or Backspacehackers follow up. Feedback appreciated.

I think we are still on topic here, you need to have screen units, thats how you stop alpha strike pretty easy.

it is weird that units that are god heavy (Bezerkers, TS,Plague,Noise) can be alpha legion when they are...... you know.... from their own legion?

I would have one simple change, add the following stratagem to the generic ones:

"Whatever name" - 3CP: Use this stratagem at the start of the game, before units are deployed. During the first round of the game, all hit rolls suffer a -1 penalty.

With this you are curbing the power of alpha strikes at the cost of 3 CP and your own firepower. Most games you will not do it, but it is an option for those times where you meet a list with excessive turn 1 power. A fix with close to no impact on the game except that if you want to play a footslogging list it is no longer a suicide.

Mchammadads- to answer your previous question: I’d say it’s shooting and assault. I’m playing Eldar so I tend to drop 5x Wraithguard, guardians, warwalkers, quicken some banshees for T1 assault, and generally just ram things with my tanks. I’m terms of shooting, got a fair bit of BL and a Hemlock. Playing Siam Hann so super aggressive. There’s also an AL Beserkers list floating around too. Otherwise we have a guard and an ork that comes pretty regularly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The point of this mod is try to tone down my list and the AL

We did some playtesting of sorts. In a 2v2 (2000pts each player) we held reserves until turn 2, and one unit was held until turn 3. Greatly increased survivability of units, both sides still had several units left at turn 6. Would recommend it as a "gentleman's agreement" type rule.

The real issue is a lack of interactivity and ability to really do anything. If your opponent gets the drop on you, you must sit and take it. If you didn't bubblewrap or have Interceptor...you're in trouble.

Of course, mass DS armies didn't work "as" well due to cover being generally stronger (and units being able to provide cover to units behind them), shooting being "one unit versus one unit", and reserves being randomized. It was when armies could ignore or mitigate the randomization (ex: Flyrants, Grav Skyhammers, Alex Harrison's Warp Spiders) that the problems with how 40k handles pop-up reserves become self-evident.

One of the earlier fixes I suggested awhile ago was modding Overwatch to be a decision taken during the Shooting Phase. You forfeit shooting that turn, and if your opponent attempts to attack (shoot, smite, charge) that unit or another unit within 6", the Overwatching unit could shoot at -1 BS first and it would then exit Overwatch.

Nope nope nope.

My grey knights already struggle... Further nerfs to them are unwelcome.

That statement aside, it is super easy to defeat turn one deep strike armies. It is a tactic you need to account for when list building and deploying. In fact, armies i play that have deep strike in it, it gives me the control and the flexibility to either a.) Punish you for bad deployment or b.) Punish you on turns 2 or 3 for leaving your backline vulnerable.

An experienced player is safe vs alpha.

 Smotejob wrote:
Nope nope nope.

My grey knights already struggle... Further nerfs to them are unwelcome.

That statement aside, it is super easy to defeat turn one deep strike armies. It is a tactic you need to account for when list building and deploying. In fact, armies i play that have deep strike in it, it gives me the control and the flexibility to either a.) Punish you for bad deployment or b.) Punish you on turns 2 or 3 for leaving your backline vulnerable.

An experienced player is safe vs alpha.

Deep Strike Alpha, that is. Not all alphas.

^Indeed.

I liked just holding reserves, going to keep doing so in my matches for less linearity. It is distasteful and dishonorable to consistently be able to delete several hundred points T1.

MagicJuggler your overwatch suggestion is also interesting, but radical. Unless you allowed the player going second to place units in overwatch, it seems like it wouldn’t help them much. If anything wouldn’t it help T1 player to avoid wasting firepower.

 Lemane0116 wrote:
^Indeed.

I liked just holding reserves, going to keep doing so in my matches for less linearity. It is distasteful and dishonorable to consistently be able to delete several hundred points T1.

MagicJuggler your overwatch suggestion is also interesting, but radical. Unless you allowed the player going second to place units in overwatch, it seems like it wouldn’t help them much. If anything wouldn’t it help T1 player to avoid wasting firepower.

I would probably suggest either letting Player Two start in Overwatch, combining the rules with improved cover (or elimination of TLOS), turn 2 Reserves or any combination thereof. The intent was to make Overwatch a decision rather than something you got for "free" so to speak.

The original rules were a modified form of the 2nd ed Overwatch rules, tweaked to prevent the potential for standoffs in that game. "Forfeit move -> forfeit shoot" combined with "trigger on entering LOS -> trigger on attempting to attack" both allow maneuver to still matter.

(The game I'm working on is quite a bit more radical btw )

Probably not a good idea to slow down the game. The theme I've picked up on from players here and on other 40k groups is a desire for quick, decisive games. According to some here, most games are decided by turn 3. If anything, we should be looking to reduce that to turn 2.