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.

That's why I always maintain that it's "assault wyches" that are dead, "HWG wyches" are our new hope.

In any case, just to add to nosferatu1001's point: ATSKNF also denies sweeping advance, which I'd consider quite a big buff for the marine armies' assault... And possibly a "buff" if you're working with the "I don't want to slaughter them all...yet" tactic that we assault DE are so fond of(I'm not wise enough to speak for other codex).

...If only DE sells just as good...

 60mm wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

 60mm wrote:
Random Assault range and Fleet changes have reduced the reliable distance for Assault. That is a nerf.

Not across the board. I personally think Fleet is better now since it works both on the turn you charge and turns that you don't. Random assault range has increased the average charge length.

And on the turn you assault, you have no guarantee you can charge a unit 4" away.

Kingsley wrote:
The expected value of Overwatch is very low in most cases, and many units-- most notably all non-Walker vehicles-- can't do it at all. Further, its effects can be mitigated through smart play.

Just because you think the impact of a nerf is very low, does not mean it is not a nerf. I've seen several assaults fail because of overwatch.

60mm wrote:What about Disordered Charge, explain how that is not a nerf to Assault across the board? Forgot about that one?

Kingsley wrote:
Easy, it does nothing in most cases. Most assaults aren't multi-assaults, and many multi-assaults aren't affected. A Wych squad charging two Chimeras doesn't care that it's a Disordered Charge, since haywire grenades give you one attack just the same.

In "most" cases for who? That's funny that you could only pull up Wyches and Haywires again. Find one unit uneffected by this in the Tyranid Codex. Your answer to a nerf to multi-assault is that most assaults aren't multi-assaults. So hence the nerf disappeared? And "many assaults" are multi assaults against vehicles close together but not in squadrons?!? This is the most laughable one of all!

60mm wrote:Nosferatu, while the Fearless wounds change is a buff for some units in Assault, it is not an Assault buff as it has no effect on the vast majority of units

Kingsley wrote:
Neither does Overwatch, but you aren't willing to discount that. As I said earlier, things didn't get better or worse across the board, but rather in subtle ways.

There are units that have a special rule that allows them to assault without receiving Overwatch? Do tell.

Kingsley wrote:
It's easy to say "assault got nerfed" or "shooting got buffed," and it's hard to say "Dark Eldar Wyches are in some respects a riskier unit now because Overwatch introduces high variance to results when charging normal units, but changes to vehicles make their Haywire Grenades both more accurate in most cases (and much more accurate in the case of walkers and vehicles moving fast) and more damaging, so on net they are more effective against vehicles but riskier against infantry."

However, the second statement is more true than the first, so putting in the effort to understand things on a deeper level can be quite informative and useful.

Try using anything but Wyches with Haywires. Try all this for Hormagants for example. You have not, and cannot, dispprove these nerfs exist. All you can do is say that you don't think they're that bad. Does not change it from being a nerf.


TLDR
This argument is still revolving around one dispute. Are there any nerfs that Assault received across the board. You could not deny Overwatch, only said you don't think it's that bad. You couldn't disprove Disordered Charge, again only stating you think it's not that bad. Find me units that have the ability to Assault that are exempt from these rules and you win the debate. Problem is, you can't. The only codex released since 6e has no units that are exempt from these rules, which is the only possibility. But please, continue to flail.

Dirge Caster units within 6" can no overwatch fire, and if you are already engaged in hand to hand you can not over watch fire. since switch to 6th edition it just matters who you charge 1st.

daniel79 wrote:Dirge Caster units within 6" can no overwatch fire

That is a piece of wargear for vehicles for CSM. No unit has the ability to avoid Overwatch as I stated. It effects all assault across the board.

daniel79 wrote:
and if you are already engaged in hand to hand you can not over watch fire.

Point? The unit that charged said unit already got Overwatched.

I think assault has been appropriately diminished. This is a sci-fi game. Shooting should be dominant. Melee should be a risky endeavor... Frankly it should be harder than it currently is, but that would nullify an enjoyable aspect of the game and many interesting units as well.
A unit of DE Wyches charging a unit of Tau Firewarriors should be blasted to ribbons by pulse rifles before they ever close distance... But that's a little TOO lopsided.
Assault needs some sort of edge, but it shouldn't be as utilized as it has been previously.

Your friend is right, you are wrong. 6th edition 40K is model placement and shooting.

 60mm wrote:

daniel79 wrote:Dirge Caster units within 6" can no overwatch fire

That is a piece of wargear for vehicles for CSM. No unit has the ability to avoid Overwatch as I stated. It effects all assault across the board.

daniel79 wrote:
and if you are already engaged in hand to hand you can not over watch fire.

Point? The unit that charged said unit already got Overwatched.

Over watch does very little to a charging terminator squad....

only there is exactly two armies that use mass terminators for it to be a problem . if someone has a list build and cant deal with a single unit of terminators in 6th where +2 sv is very good , then his overwatch not hurting terminators much is the least of his problems.

I see it this way . shoting has 3 random rolls to get effect . hit/wound/save. assault has 4 . charge/hit/wound/save. in any game less random effects is better.. Specialy when most armies that are shoty , are not tau or IG . charging SW or 10-12 csm is not auto win in assault .

 -Loki- wrote:


But every time I hear someone say the Overwatch completely neuters assault, I have to wonder if they're remembering to resolve it as Snapfire. I've never lost more than a few Gaunts to Overwatch, certainly never enough to even drop me out of assault range. I really haven't found it to be the game changing rule it's claimed to be.

They most likely assaulted Tesla Immortals

It's hilarious when your enemy charges a unit of 10 immortals only to get hit by 6 hits in return...once made it to a ridiculous amount of 18 hits

5th edition was already a dominantly shooty game. 6th edition took it a lot further.

6th edition is a game of shooting, flying, and tarpits.

Daniel - say that to flamers of tzeentch. Ouch.

Kingsley - my average charge range, in the open, was 6" in 5th edition. It was also the population. I could not miss an assault 5.9" away in 5th, i can in 6th. That loss of reliability is huge, and is a strict nerf.

 60mm wrote:
And on the turn you assault, you have no guarantee you can charge a unit 4" away.

So assault has to deal with some of the same uncertainties as shooting now in exchange for its greater reward? Color me shocked.

60mm wrote:Just because you think the impact of a nerf is very low, does not mean it is not a nerf. I've seen several assaults fail because of overwatch.

And I've never lost a model to it. While technically a nerf, its impact on most units is absolutely minimal. In fact, it can be a blessing in disguise. I recently played against someone who took flamers rather than plasma guns on his Imperial Guard blob so that it could be better at Overwatch-- however, this decreased its overall firepower and the fact that he was playing to Overwatch meant that his actual ability to shoot my down was greatly decreased.

60mm wrote:Your answer to a nerf to multi-assault is that most assaults aren't multi-assaults. So hence the nerf disappeared?

Correct. A nerf to something that doesn't happen essentially doesn't matter. For instance, if they nerfed charges that contacted four or more units, nobody would care because those charges don't happen. Multi-assaults themselves are rare and often they are not affected by the change anyway.

60mm wrote:And "many assaults" are multi assaults against vehicles close together but not in squadrons?!? This is the most laughable one of all!

Good players often use vehicles, especially empty transports, as blocking elements to prevent you from assaulting more important units. In 5th edition, the fact that you had to hit those vehicles on sixes made this tactic extremely powerful. In 6th edition, it's easier to hit those vehicles, and the Disordered Charge change does almost nothing to help them, since most of the time you'll be using grenades against them anyway.

60mm wrote:Nosferatu, while the Fearless wounds change is a buff for some units in Assault, it is not an Assault buff as it has no effect on the vast majority of units

It's interesting that you recognize that changes that have no effect the vast majority of the time don't count as true buffs or nerfs when it supports your argument, but not when it's against it.

 Kingsley wrote:

 60mm wrote:
And on the turn you assault, you have no guarantee you can charge a unit 4" away.

So assault has to deal with some of the same uncertainties as shooting now in exchange for its greater reward? Color me shocked.

What kind of weapon are you firing where you don't know the range before you shoot?

In fact, there are no longer any uncertainties to shooting in 6th edition, with the advent of pre-measuring.

 Kingsley wrote:

 60mm wrote:

60mm wrote:Your answer to a nerf to multi-assault is that most assaults aren't multi-assaults. So hence the nerf disappeared?

Correct. A nerf to something that doesn't happen essentially doesn't matter. For instance, if they nerfed charges that contacted four or more units, nobody would care because those charges don't happen. Multi-assaults themselves are rare and often they are not affected by the change anyway.

Multi-assaults happen lots if you build and plan for them. My Paladinstar and Nobstar armies relied heavily on setting up strong multi-assaults to win games. A lot of times I'd clean up entire sections of a table in a single turn. It certainly wasn't rare when I played for it.

60mm wrote:And "many assaults" are multi assaults against vehicles close together but not in squadrons?!? This is the most laughable one of all!

Good players often use vehicles, especially empty transports, as blocking elements to prevent you from assaulting more important units. In 5th edition, the fact that you had to hit those vehicles on sixes made this tactic extremely powerful. In 6th edition, it's easier to hit those vehicles, and the Disordered Charge change does almost nothing to help them, since most of the time you'll be using grenades against them anyway.

That depends entirely on what's assaulting what. Besides, it's always been optimal to shoot down vehicles instead of assaulting them, this has never changed.

60mm wrote:Nosferatu, while the Fearless wounds change is a buff for some units in Assault, it is not an Assault buff as it has no effect on the vast majority of units

It's interesting that you recognize that changes that have no effect the vast majority of the time don't count as true buffs or nerfs when it supports your argument, but not when it's against it.

Kingsley - multi assaults are rare?

The many hundreds I performed in 4th and 5th must have been imaginary.

And don't even get me started on the good ol' Death Company Slingshot of Rage (TM).

 Archonate wrote:
I think assault has been appropriately diminished. This is a sci-fi game. Shooting should be dominant. Melee should be a risky endeavor... Frankly it should be harder than it currently is, but that would nullify an enjoyable aspect of the game and many interesting units as well.
A unit of DE Wyches charging a unit of Tau Firewarriors should be blasted to ribbons by pulse rifles before they ever close distance... But that's a little TOO lopsided.
Assault needs some sort of edge, but it shouldn't be as utilized as it has been previously.

Once a poster said explained how melee makes sense.

The is nothing scifi in ranged weapons. The point is to use weapons that penetrate enemies armor. In the 41st millenium people have pretty good armor and it makes sense trying to kill them with swords that can penetrate that armor.

 Kingsley wrote:

 60mm wrote:
Assault isn't dead, just nerfed. Dakka got improvements, Assault got nerfs.

If Dakka got buffs and Assault stayed the same, Assault falls behind.

If Dakka stayed the same and Assault gets nerfed, Assault falls behind

If Dakka got buffs and Assault got nerfs, Assault falls farther behind.

No way to debate that without making things up.

Assault also got buffs, though. Things aren't as straightforward as a lot of people seem to think.

Actually they are pretty straight forward; here's a look at what assault lost, and what it gained.

Cons:

- Your charge distance is at the mercy of the dice
- You can no longer run and assault with Fleet (and currently end up with a lower movement average than before in that regard)
- Grenades got nerfed for assaulting through terrain in that they only work for the models wielding them unlike before where one model with grenades benefitted the whole unit
- Overwatch returned
- A unit type that can't be assaulted was born and became a staple in many lists (flyers)
- You can't assault out of a non-assault vehicle ever and that includes when it is destroyed on you
- Multi-charges were nerfed
- Challenges killed a lot of the potential of combat beast characters
- You can't assault on the turn you come on from reserves
- You can't assault if you Infiltrate or Scout and go first
- The distance from which an assault vehicle brings you closer to the enemy is reduced (formerly move 12" and disembark 2", now move 6" and disembark 6" not accounting for terrain)
- Some random objectives half your assault range
- Furious Charge got nerfed

Pros:

- Assaulting vehicles is better (but still not a valid form of anti-tank, a concept that is not as important anymore either)
- Hammer of Wrath

Top all that off with the various boosts to shooting (Snap Shots, lesser cover, etc.) and it becomes pretty straight forward, whatever way you want to slice it.

And for the record, the idea that multi-assaults were rare is laughable. It could be seen at any real tournament you went to, and all good players used it to great effect. My Purifiers are certainly laughing their asses off at the concept.

illuknisaa wrote:The is nothing scifi in ranged weapons. The point is to use weapons that penetrate enemies armor. In the 41st millenium people have pretty good armor and it makes sense trying to kill them with swords that can penetrate that armor.

Actually a propelled exloding shell is much more likely to penetrate armour than a sword. There's a reason why war switched to firearms so quickly in the real world.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

illuknisaa wrote:The is nothing scifi in ranged weapons. The point is to use weapons that penetrate enemies armor. In the 41st millenium people have pretty good armor and it makes sense trying to kill them with swords that can penetrate that armor.

Actually a propelled exloding shell is much more likely to penetrate armour than a sword. There's a reason why war switched to firearms so quickly in the real world.

Keep in mind, a power sword is different from a conventional sword. Hence why melee combat would be relevant in a sci-fi universe where everyone has 3" thick armour.

Of course, you also forgot to list that power weapons got massively nerfed as well, which is also pretty relevant to any assault specialist.

Simply put, in 6th edition, close combat does less damage, is harder to get into, and is easier to defend against, and gained almost nothing to make up for it, while shooting got much more powerful in a lot of meaningful ways, while losing nothing.

Multi-assaults are typically only executed in the case of Nob Bikers and the like (which aren't viable thanks to the removal of wound allocation) or against people who don't understand the concept of blocking. Remember, you aren't the one who gets to choose whether or not you multi-assault, your opponent is.

text removed.
Reds8n

 Kingsley wrote:
Multi-assaults are typically only executed in the case of Nob Bikers and the like (which aren't viable thanks to the removal of wound allocation) or against people who don't understand the concept of blocking. Remember, you aren't the one who gets to choose whether or not you multi-assault, your opponent is.

Are you talking 5th or 6th? Because that's not how it worked in 5th.

 Fafnir wrote:
Keep in mind, a power sword is different from a conventional sword. Hence why melee combat would be relevant in a sci-fi universe where everyone has 3" thick armour.

Except it wouldn't. Even ignoring nuclear weapons (or melta guns, which easily cut through tank armor) at some point the momentum of a shot becomes high enough that even if your armor holds you're going to die. All of that momentum has to go somewhere, and what's left is going to be a perfectly intact set of armor that they hose out for the next guy.


Assaulting only makes "sense" because weapon ranges are not 28mm scale in 40k. If you scaled up the distances to match the size of the models you'd find the game almost entirely based on shooting, with maybe a very rare case where you'd assault a unit in a trench/bunker/etc that can't just be smashed by artillery. Dedicated assault armies would be shot to death before getting onto the same 6x4 table as their target.

Which is a good thing for assault-happy armies that in the 40k universe, most general-use small arms aren't at such a power-level yet. And Space Marines are likely engineered to be able to withstand such weaponry to begin with (at least, the more basic stuff, we all know what happens when a Smurf eats a Melta gun) Also keep in mind that not all aliens are as fragile as a human in their physiology. A pissed-off Ork or Nurgle devotee wouldn't have too much trouble shrugging off some truly volatile fire, especially if there were hordes of them (which Orkz are more than happy to attack in).

Besides, even if you do put the scale in a more realistic environment, keep in mind that many battles in the world of 40k would take place in densely populated urban environments, which would force many close quarters encounters. In a hive city, you'd probably be doing just as well to carry a good close-combat weapon as you'd be to carry a gun, albeit for different uses.

That said, ranged weaponry is obviously the more practical form of combat. But if we really want to argue semantics, we could start asking why so many battles even take place on the ground to begin with, and why Battlefleet Gothic isn't the flagship game of the 41st millennium.

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
Multi-assaults are typically only executed in the case of Nob Bikers and the like (which aren't viable thanks to the removal of wound allocation) or against people who don't understand the concept of blocking. Remember, you aren't the one who gets to choose whether or not you multi-assault, your opponent is.

Are you talking 5th or 6th? Because that's not how it worked in 5th.

I can't recall the last time that someone has executed a multi-assault against me in fifth OR sixth edition (units with characters don't count)-- I think maybe once at the Bay Area Open two years ago against a squad and immobilized vehicle? It's not exactly a normal state of affairs, assuming proper planning.

In my humble opinion, army based 40k is correctly scaled when played at Epic size.

There's not enough Epic around. We need more Epic.

Those who think that assault is still viable should clearly try to play a Melee centric Ork army...

Overwatch :

_Yes, Overwatch kills. Sometimes, losing 1 model means losing 1 inch, and failing the charge. And when you have a T-shirt save, Wall of Death really means "WALL-OF-DEATH". Oh, did I mention that we're Init 2 ? Well, now my Trukk boyz lose on average 2 models when they try to charge a Tactical squad, then the Marines get to strike and kill another 2 Boyz, who are now 7+Nob. Which leads me to the 2nd point :

Challenges :

_PK Nob gets challenged by MEQ sergeant : if the Nob declines, he's out. If he accepts, he risks being killed before he gets to strike. If he wins, he only killed 1 model, despite having 4 attacks. It's a lose-lose-lose situation. The same problems exists for our Warbosses, who get to kill a measly sergeant with their 6 S10 attacks, while they should have crushed half the squad. Oh, did I mention that when the Marine Sergeant dies, the squad can choose to run away, and is now free to shoot you in the face ? Even if you sweep them, all you won is another round of combat, without the bonus attack from the charge.

_Boyz get charged by [Wraithlord, Dreadknight, Tervigon, Hive Tyrant, etc...]. [Creature] issues challenge. Now it's the same as above, but you can't even hope to win the challenge. And either way, you're now stuck in CC with something you can't hurt, but since you're Fearless there's nothing you can do but die.

Foot-slogging assault units :

_As it's been said before, casualties removed from the front makes them completely useless. It took me 3 turns to move less than 15" in a recent game against Blood Angels, because of a single Baal Predator...

Trukk assault :

_Assault from Reserves is no longer possible, which means that your Trukks have to be on the table for at least one turn before you can charge. Unless you run 9 Trukks, they'll get blown up.

Assaulting vehicles :

_Still the same cr*p : you wrecked the vehicle ? Passengers disembark and shoot and / or assault you. You blew up the vehicle ? Get ready to lose at least 5 Boyz in the explosion. Then the passengers disembark and shoot and / or assault you. You didn't wreck nor blow up the vehicle ? Passengers disembark and shoot and / or assault you.

Multi-assault :

_You "can't recall the last time that someone has executed a multi-assault against you" ? Well, good for you if you only play with non-competitive people. I happen to play Orks, and multi-assault was my bread and butter. I can hardly remember a game where I didn't do it, jumping out of a Battlewagon with 20 Slugga boyz to engage 2 or more ennemy squads. Now it's over. Oh, by the way :

Charging after Tank shock / Ram :

_Yeah, no longer possible. It's not like our whole army relied on opening ennemy transport vehicles with Deffrolas before assaulting the content isn't it ?

Sorry for the rant, I've been shuting my mouth ever since 6th edition came out, but it had to come out eventually...

 Nym wrote:


Charging after Tank shock / Ram :

_Yeah, no longer possible. It's not like our whole army relied on opening ennemy transport vehicles with Deffrolas before assaulting the content isn't it ?

Well, obviously this was taken out, because a mob of Orkz leaping from their vehicles onto the enemy craft after it's been crippled by a massive blow to finish off the trapped occupants in their sudden and desperate last stand is not cinematic at all, and does very little to build a narrative.

Now, gunlines, that's a story.

 Nym wrote:
You "can't recall the last time that someone has executed a multi-assault against you" ? Well, good for you if you only play with non-competitive people. I happen to play Orks, and multi-assault was my bread and butter. I can hardly remember a game where I didn't do it, jumping out of a Battlewagon with 20 Slugga boyz to engage 2 or more ennemy squads. Now it's over.

On the contrary, most of the games I've played have been in a tournament setting. The thing is, players don't "just multi-assault you." They have to get to you first, and since you have a movement phase as well as the enemy, you can throw your units forward to block enemies from charging multiple units. These techniques have been bread and butter for Tau players for a while, but other armies can use them just as effectively. Remember, games are usually won or lost in the movement phase.

And, again, multiassaults were certainly not "rare", as you claimed. Tank shocking makes a mockery of blocking units, as do JI, etc.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Nym wrote:


Charging after Tank shock / Ram :

_Yeah, no longer possible. It's not like our whole army relied on opening ennemy transport vehicles with Deffrolas before assaulting the content isn't it ?

Well, obviously this was taken out, because a mob of Orkz leaping from their vehicles onto the enemy craft after it's been crippled by a massive blow to finish off the trapped occupants in their sudden and desperate last stand is not cinematic at all, and does very little to build a narrative.

Now, gunlines, that's a story.

Exalted.... But i just made myself sad too...