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.

Overwatch
A unit with this rule can choose to enter Overwatch in the Shooting phase. While in Overwatch, they cannot move. If they do, then in your opponent's Movement or Charge phase, when an enemy unit finishes Normal, Advance, or Fall Back Move or declares a Charge within 24" of and visible to the Overwatching unit, they can shoot that enemy as if it was your Shooting phase. When these attacks are made, worsen the Ballistic Skill of all ranged weapons equipped by the attacking unit by 1, to no worse than a 6+.

A unit cannot make more than one Overwatch attack per turn.

---------------------------------

Compared to the current strat...

+Costs no CP
+Can be used by multiple units
+Has -1 BS instead of nat 6s only

But...

-Cannot be used against the start of an enemy's movement, only the end or charge declaration

That last change was intentional, to help maneuvering stay important.

What units might get it...

Marines
Intercessors-but also change Target Elimination to only work in your Shooting Phase. Or just get rid of it, because it's still bonkers.
Heavy Intercessors
Maybe Eliminators?
Suppressors
Maybe Aggressors?

Guard
Krieg (Battleline)
Wyvern
Maybe Scout Sentinels?

Daemons!
Ha, that's funny.

So, call it 'On Guard' or something, instead of the existing keyword of Overwatch.
Aeldari Dire Avengers used to have Hits-on-5+ for Overwatch, and might have had a way to use Overwatch even if it had already been used, or something similar.

I haven't played 2nd edition since 3rd came out but from memory I had quite a few games which were essentially Mexican standoffs. Everyone going on Overwatch, waiting for the other side to make the first move.

I think the reason GW haven't reintroduced Overwatch in the same way it was then was to prevent this standoff from happening. The Overwatch you describe penalises close combat units that want to charge out of cover. I know you are saying there's a penalty to hit, I'm not sure this is enough to prevent the abuse of this rule though.

 Skinnereal wrote:
So, call it 'On Guard' or something, instead of the existing keyword of Overwatch.
Aeldari Dire Avengers used to have Hits-on-5+ for Overwatch, and might have had a way to use Overwatch even if it had already been used, or something similar.

This is to REPLACE the Stratagem, not in addition to it.
Apologies for not making that clear.

El Torro wrote:
I haven't played 2nd edition since 3rd came out but from memory I had quite a few games which were essentially Mexican standoffs. Everyone going on Overwatch, waiting for the other side to make the first move.

I think the reason GW haven't reintroduced Overwatch in the same way it was then was to prevent this standoff from happening. The Overwatch you describe penalises close combat units that want to charge out of cover. I know you are saying there's a penalty to hit, I'm not sure this is enough to prevent the abuse of this rule though.

For a charge, you activate Overwatch on charge declaration.
So if you can't see them when they start the charge, you can't Overwatch them.

How would the T'au's reliance on Overwatch be covered? An army-wide change for their use?

 Skinnereal wrote:
How would the T'au's reliance on Overwatch be covered? An army-wide change for their use?

Do Tau still rely on that?
I don’t play them, so I don’t know for sure, but I thought they didn’t have special access to it anymore.

El Torro wrote:I haven't played 2nd edition since 3rd came out but from memory I had quite a few games which were essentially Mexican standoffs. Everyone going on Overwatch, waiting for the other side to make the first move.

I think the reason GW haven't reintroduced Overwatch in the same way it was then was to prevent this standoff from happening. The Overwatch you describe penalises close combat units that want to charge out of cover. I know you are saying there's a penalty to hit, I'm not sure this is enough to prevent the abuse of this rule though.

That was my first thought, but then I realized JNA is only proposing putting this on certain units. And if that's the case, I don't think the "Mexican standoff" thing is likely to be an issue unless a player has a faction with a bunch of overwatch threats and takes a lot of them.

I think I like this suggestion. I have a vague concern about implementation. That is, I feel like the number of units that can reasonably overwatch should probably be kind of on the high side for a lot of factions, and it feels very tempting to create stratagems or rules for commander characters that lets you put other units on overwatch. But if you do make it too abundant, then the standoff issue is more likely to arise. Like, I kind of want tactical marines and intercessors and maybe even sternguard to be able to go on overwatch, but that's potentially a lot of overwatch fire you could squeeze into one place.

I'm inventing problems now, but if we did end up with too much access to this version of overwatch, we could theoretically defang it a little by making it mandatory to fire overwatch when you have the chance. So like, your opponent has created a firing squad of a bunch of overwatching units, but most of those shots are bolters or whatever. So you move your tank forward first and let all those S4 shots plink mostly-harmlessly off of the hull, freeing up your infantry units to move in behind it.

JNAProductions wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:
How would the T'au's reliance on Overwatch be covered? An army-wide change for their use?

Do Tau still rely on that?
I don’t play them, so I don’t know for sure, but I thought they didn’t have special access to it anymore.

I haven't played my tau much, but this definitely isn't a thing in 10th. I'm not even sure they still had special overwatch in 9th.

Am I wrong or what you suggest already implemented in boarding actions? You can set unit in overwatch/defence instead of shooting. Still there is no 5+ or restrictions for units. But it's work nice

Conceptually speaking, such an Overwatch Rule should be tied to specialist units or weapons that are used to control area and suppress charges. Think how machine-guns were used during WW1 and WW2 to prevent enemy movement and charges. It isn't that anybody wants to charge into a unit of rifleman, but people really don't want to charge a machine-gun nest.

The same thing goes for sniper type weapons. People really don't like it when they are taking fire from an unknown direction.

 kabaakaba wrote:
Am I wrong or what you suggest already implemented in boarding actions? You can set unit in overwatch/defence instead of shooting. Still there is no 5+ or restrictions for units. But it's work nice

Yeah. Boarding Actions does something similar. I don't have any first-hand experience with it, but I think the mechanic is kept reigned in pretty well by a combination of factors. Boarding Actions doesn't have a ton of wide-open areas, and I *think* units or even models are prevented from shooting through their friends' bases. So it's hard to point half an army's overwatch at a single incoming target. Plus, the type and number of units you can field is heavily limited by your detachment of choice. So you can't, for instance, spam a bunch of swooping hawk squads to drown the enemy in S4 lethal hits overwatch.

As I said, I haven't played BA yet, but on paper it seems like a great game/system including this OW mechanic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 alextroy wrote:
Conceptually speaking, such an Overwatch Rule should be tied to specialist units or weapons that are used to control area and suppress charges. Think how machine-guns were used during WW1 and WW2 to prevent enemy movement and charges. It isn't that anybody wants to charge into a unit of rifleman, but people really don't want to charge a machine-gun nest.

The same thing goes for sniper type weapons. People really don't like it when they are taking fire from an unknown direction.

Inclined to agree, but part of me also feels like Overwatch is exactly the sort of thing that your basic rifle boy squads should be doing to make themselves relevant. When I ask myself why marines field a bunch more intercessors or tactical marines instead of just equipping everyone to be a hellblaster or devastator, this is the sort of thing that comes to mind. Flexible tactics.

But of course, if we're giving this rule to all the "basic rifle boys" of most factions, then the amount of potential overwatch floating around adds up pretty fast...