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.

We compromised.

If a victorious unit wants to consolidate into another enemy unit, it may try if reaches on a D6" consolidation move. If the enemy unit wants to avoid it, both sides roll a D6; if the victor has the same result or higher it locks another unit in combat. If not, it consolidates normally but can't engage another unit.

This keep some measure of doubt in the assaulting force, and forces the gunlines to spread out a bit.

So, I don't know all the changes with 6e at all, but would it change the game too much to blend the new and old editions to allow a SINGLE consolidation move (which also loses the +1 attack for charging) after that first successful assault? That way, units that are especially good at hand-to-hand can get the benefit that if they can overrun a unit, they can essentially "take cover" from ranged reprisals by their enemy by sweeping into another unit.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
So, I don't know all the changes with 6e at all, but would it change the game too much to blend the new and old editions to allow a SINGLE consolidation move (which also loses the +1 attack for charging) after that first successful assault? That way, units that are especially good at hand-to-hand can get the benefit that if they can overrun a unit, they can essentially "take cover" from ranged reprisals by their enemy by sweeping into another unit.

Yes, it would break the game.

First turn:
Assault terminators charge Fire Warriors and wipe out the unit.
Assault terminators consolidate into combat with crisis suits.

Next turn:
Assault terminators finish off the crisis suits.
Assault terminators charge into combat with broadsides.

Etc.

At no point in this scenario are the assault terminators out of combat and open to being shot, so all the Tau player can do is just pull off models and wait for the game to finally end.

Although - charges from desperate positions are legitimate moves even today. I'd be happy to let a unit conslifate into CC if the enemy failed a LD check - they were so unnerved by the crazy charge that they failed to shoot the chargers down.

 Peregrine wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
So, I don't know all the changes with 6e at all, but would it change the game too much to blend the new and old editions to allow a SINGLE consolidation move (which also loses the +1 attack for charging) after that first successful assault? That way, units that are especially good at hand-to-hand can get the benefit that if they can overrun a unit, they can essentially "take cover" from ranged reprisals by their enemy by sweeping into another unit.

Yes, it would break the game.

First turn:
Assault terminators charge Fire Warriors and wipe out the unit.
Assault terminators consolidate into combat with crisis suits.

Next turn:
Assault terminators finish off the crisis suits.
Assault terminators charge into combat with broadsides.

Etc.

At no point in this scenario are the assault terminators out of combat and open to being shot, so all the Tau player can do is just pull off models and wait for the game to finally end.

Hey maybe the tau could get a rule for shooting into combat called "The Greater Good" so they can avoid that situation. The tau roll a d6 food each shot... on a 4+ the shot hits the tau.Fire warriors in an assault are as good as dead anyways. Lol

Brother SRM wrote:It was a little different in 4th

... yeah, I was going to say...

This has only been a problem since 5th edition, not a problem since forever. And I agree, assaulty armies have a lot more problems now that 6th ed is around. Loss of by-unit cover, casualties taken from the front, loss of properly hidden weapon upgrades, random assault ranges and overwatch (yes, which I have used to kill something out of assault range before), amongst many, many other reasons are why assault is bad in 6th ed.

I hate to say it, but it seems like assault, outside of a defensive role, or a very tiny select few units is just going to have to wait until 7th ed or some very serious codex changes before it becomes all that viable again.

 Peregrine wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
So, I don't know all the changes with 6e at all, but would it change the game too much to blend the new and old editions to allow a SINGLE consolidation move (which also loses the +1 attack for charging) after that first successful assault? That way, units that are especially good at hand-to-hand can get the benefit that if they can overrun a unit, they can essentially "take cover" from ranged reprisals by their enemy by sweeping into another unit.

Yes, it would break the game.

First turn:
Assault terminators charge Fire Warriors and wipe out the unit.
Assault terminators consolidate into combat with crisis suits.

Next turn:
Assault terminators finish off the crisis suits.
Assault terminators charge into combat with broadsides.

Etc.

At no point in this scenario are the assault terminators out of combat and open to being shot, so all the Tau player can do is just pull off models and wait for the game to finally end.

Frankly, if you don't move your JSJ unit out of the way you deserve to have it killed. The entire scenario can be avoided by just moving away from the assault, rather than just surrounding it and then pouring fire into the CC unit.

Consolidation into new combats is gone and the game is better for it. I hope it stays gone. (yes I play IG, I also play CSM's which even with their newest codex haven't yet been able to shake off the old "smash and consolidate" paradigm). Consolidation into new assaults never allowed a bonus attack for charging and it was always horrifically abusive. Yeah, the bit about being *too* successful is a bit of oddness, but there's no real good answer. Consolidating into new combats was way too effective, unless we want to start adding in the ability to shoot *into* combat

 Peregrine wrote:

kb305 wrote:
what is your point? are you saying remove assaulting from the game or make it even worse than it is already?

Make it worse. Assaulting should be the final attack to finish off the remains of a dug-in unit that you have crippled through shooting. You should not have entire units (and armies!) dedicated to assaulting, because the vast majority of the time they would just be shot to death uselessly.

An IG player complaining about assaulting. My, my, haven't I read that before.

 Sigvatr wrote:
An IG player complaining about assaulting. My, my, haven't I read that before.

That wasn't just an IG concern in 4th. You'd have any good shooting troops outplayed by assault units, when the real life applications for a long time already have been reduced to charging shaken irregular troops. American troops in the Iraq invasion were impressed that Iraqi irregulars would charge them, but shot them down before getting into knife range. Same goes for just about anyone who has a choice and a ranged weapon.

Peregrine - then you played a different 4th ed to everyone else. New players, or those who didnt plan ahead, got caught by consolidate into combat.

You also, conveniently, ignored that it was either a D6" move, so hardly massive, or 3" (depending on how combat ended) - apparently "bubble wrapping" was a term you never managed to think of in 4th ed.

It usually went - turn 2, assault terminators charge, but the Tau player has seen this is perhaps inevitable and pushed a cheap unit out front, leaving no viable way around (so theyre not getting as close as fast) . They assault, smash the unit, are now 7"+ away from the units that could also move and fire, and die next turn. Rinse, repeat

It wasnt "broken", it made assault, one of the 3 phases of the game, actually viable. 5th made it MUCH less so, 6th even less again

You are also complaining about realism in a game based around gengineered warrior monks firing gyro stabilised grenades. Really, at what point did you think "realism" is a design criteria?

 RunningWithScissors wrote:
We can safely assume that GW will not try to make Assaults a minor part of the game. If they did it they would nerf Lots of armies. How would you feel if Your 3000 point close combat army is no longer even playable in a friendly setting.

If it makes you pay for another 3000 points of shooty models. GW will send out a thundering "Meh..."

This has always been the case, you learn to deal with it (i.e not over committing to a assault).

Assault is still a important part that needs to be planned for, in 5th I could run 60%+ assault elements and preform relatively well. In 6th I run about 40% and can expect similar results, adjustments are made but its far from 'dead'.

tjat's what the consolidation rule is for. If you roll well, you can grab some cover. Assaulting a unit is a risk. If you don't want to take a risk on something, don't do it. simple...

BLUF: Consolidating into enemies but allowing overwatch isn't overpowering at all.



I'm generally in favor of the game becoming more killy, so rolling from one assault to the next I'm in favor of. However, I played Tau in 3rd and 4th edition so I felt the pain of that pretty bad. However, now the pendulum has swung way in the other direction instead of trying to get to the center.

Why not make it so you can roll from one assault to another, but obviously can't make extra swings. All it would do is lock you in combat.

The unit you charge into would get to overwatch, and you're only moving D6".



I mean, let's do some mathhammer:

225 points for a 5 man hammernator squad, deep strikes 9" from two 10 man tau squads with sgt and photon grenades (to try to keep this a little realistic).

The two fire warrior teams move to be 15" away from the hammernator squad, this isn't especially difficult to do.
40 shots - 20 hits - 13.33 wounds - 2.22 through save. (3 terminators remaining)


Say the hammernators roll well and get into an assault with one squad. Not an easy feat because they'd have to roll a 9 on the charge (a 27.78% chance).

Overwatch:
20 shots - 3.33 hits - 2.22 wounds - .37 through save. (2.59 total wounds 2 terminators remaining)
Tau swing:
11 attacks - 5.5 hits - 1.83 wounds - .31 through save (2.90 total wounds 2 terminators remaining)
Terminators swing:
4 attacks - 2.67 hits - 2.22 wounds - 2.22 through save

Fire warriors lost and flee, will most likely regroup next turn.

Terminators get a lucky roll and consolidate into the other fire warrior squad.


Overwatch duplicated:
.37 through save (3.27 total wounds, 2 terminators remain)



Next turn, Tau swing first:
.31 through save (3.58 total wounds, 1 terminator remains)
Terminator swings:
2 attacks - 1.33 hits - 1.11 wounds - 1.11 through save




I can continue this to the bitter end, but the Tau actually end up winning this. Maybe the result would be different if the hammernators were coming out of a land raider, but that gets out of the vacuum concept and the Tau would just take a broadside.

Honestly just doing this with fire warriors and assuming everything rolls odds, the Terminators only kill 121 points worth of Tau and don't even wipe out any squads. This has them locked in combat for 6 player turns as well so nothing else could hurt them. The first 3 squads of Tau ended up fleeing, so the terminators ate 4 rounds of overwatch. I personally think this is hardly "rolling through the entire army". They didn't even roll through their equal points.


Overwatch hurts, random charges hurt, and enemies that can move and shoot hurt. This seems to balance it out to me.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Peregrine - then you played a different 4th ed to everyone else. New players, or those who didnt plan ahead, got caught by consolidate into combat.

This is patently false, it wasn't hard to herd units into good consolidation range and in every edition it has often been necessary to place units near each other. This could be mitigated, but even against very experienced players this was not an uncommon scenario.

You also, conveniently, ignored that it was either a D6" move, so hardly massive, or 3" (depending on how combat ended) - apparently "bubble wrapping" was a term you never managed to think of in 4th ed.

Not every army could take expendable cheap bubble wrap units.

It usually went - turn 2, assault terminators charge, but the Tau player has seen this is perhaps inevitable and pushed a cheap unit out front, leaving no viable way around (so theyre not getting as close as fast) . They assault, smash the unit, are now 7"+ away from the units that could also move and fire, and die next turn. Rinse, repeat

Or the SM's would just blow away the cheap unit with a minimal amount of firepower and clear the way for the terminators to assault...

It wasnt "broken", it made assault, one of the 3 phases of the game, actually viable. 5th made it MUCH less so, 6th even less again

It made Assault dominant, not merely viable.

Consolidating into hand to hand was 3rd edition, not 4th, wasn't it?

 pretre wrote:
Consolidating into hand to hand was 3rd edition, not 4th, wasn't it?

3rd and 4th, 5th was the one that got rid of it.

Cool, I missed 4th, so wasn't sure. I do remember rhino rush, disembark, assault, consolidate into the next one in 3rd though. That was crazy.

I like the idea of consolidating on a d6 into an enemy unit but why not carry over extra wounds as extra attacks that you have to roll to hit and wound again but allows some retaliation from taking a second Overwatch

 amanita wrote:
We compromised.

If a victorious unit wants to consolidate into another enemy unit, it may try if reaches on a D6" consolidation move. If the enemy unit wants to avoid it, both sides roll a D6; if the victor has the same result or higher it locks another unit in combat. If not, it consolidates normally but can't engage another unit.

This keep some measure of doubt in the assaulting force, and forces the gunlines to spread out a bit.

This isn't a compromise. It's screwing Tau, IG, and 'Crons and giving units of other factions function that they aren't paying for. Why not increase Tau gun range and give Crons 20% more points. That would make as much sense.

 Lobukia wrote:

 amanita wrote:
We compromised.

If a victorious unit wants to consolidate into another enemy unit, it may try if reaches on a D6" consolidation move. If the enemy unit wants to avoid it, both sides roll a D6; if the victor has the same result or higher it locks another unit in combat. If not, it consolidates normally but can't engage another unit.

This keep some measure of doubt in the assaulting force, and forces the gunlines to spread out a bit.

This isn't a compromise. It's screwing Tau, IG, and 'Crons and giving units of other factions function that they aren't paying for. Why not increase Tau gun range and give Crons 20% more points. That would make as much sense.

I did the math up above of Hammernators charging an equal amount of points of Fire Warriors. It really doesn't break the game if you allow for overwatch.

 rabid1903 wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:

 amanita wrote:
We compromised.

If a victorious unit wants to consolidate into another enemy unit, it may try if reaches on a D6" consolidation move. If the enemy unit wants to avoid it, both sides roll a D6; if the victor has the same result or higher it locks another unit in combat. If not, it consolidates normally but can't engage another unit.

This keep some measure of doubt in the assaulting force, and forces the gunlines to spread out a bit.

This isn't a compromise. It's screwing Tau, IG, and 'Crons and giving units of other factions function that they aren't paying for. Why not increase Tau gun range and give Crons 20% more points. That would make as much sense.

I did the math up above of Hammernators charging an equal amount of points of Fire Warriors. It really doesn't break the game if you allow for overwatch.

How about Ork boys assaulting sequential squads of FW. Taking away FW RF and movement for one turn is a huge hit and they gain nothing. Still would have got their overwatch, but they lose out on a turn of use. If all of my units were facing possibly one less turn of shooting and dying earlier than otherwise, you'd be spotting me some serious points before I'd even consider giving you a free pass on being shot at because you think assaults suffer (which they don't).

To others making the realism argument, really?! Ships that fly Master Chiefs and Rambos through hell to serve a corpse while battling hooligan fungus monkeys, giant cockroaches, hippy elves, and anime bots... And you play the realism card? It's plastic soldiers with fantasy in space fluff. I suppose chess doesn't work for you since cavalry doesn't really jump over friendly soldiers and only move at right angles?

 AegisGrimm wrote:

Make it worse. Assaulting should be the final attack to finish off the remains of a dug-in unit that you have crippled through shooting. You should not have entire units (and armies!) dedicated to assaulting, because the vast majority of the time they would just be shot to death uselessly.

Exactly. A game set in a world with spaceships, apocalyptic weapons, and Titans striding the battlefields shouldn't have entire forces who specialize in sword-fighting, no matter how high-tech the swords. This isn't Star Wars with Jedi- a bayonet charge across a battlefield against a healthy unit with ranged weapons should be considered nearly suicidal without the proper precautions and the accompanying tactics to misdirect fire away from the assaulting unit.

I disagree strongly. The space-fantasy thing 40K has going on relies heavily on the idea of close combat. Either from faceless hordes of monsters, or crusading 'knights' in armour. Given the massive gulf between technology levels even within certain factions, I hardly see this as breaking the suspension of disbelief.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

Nerm86 wrote:
I dont see what distance and scale have to do with it when the drop pod is smashing into the ground right next to you.

Because "right next to you" in 28mm scale should be on the other end of the 6'x4' table, not literally within a 28mm-scale foot or two (close enough that the shock of impact would probably kill you before the marines could even disembark).

No, in 28mm scale a drop pod would still land within 6" of the enemy. As would teleport attacks and so on. What makes you think it'd land all the way over there?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

Yes, it would break the game.

First turn:
Assault terminators charge Fire Warriors and wipe out the unit.
Assault terminators consolidate into combat with crisis suits.

Next turn:
Assault terminators finish off the crisis suits.
Assault terminators charge into combat with broadsides.

How are the Terminators in assault range on turn 1? I assume you mean turn 2 or 3. Further, they have to roll high enough to get into combat on that turn. Then they have to eat a round of overwatch. Then they have to roll high enough to catch the crisis suits, and eat another round of overwatch. Then the Tau player has to decide he doesn't want to move his Broadsides out of that 6" threat bubble. Then the Terminators have to roll high enough to catch them, and eat another round of overwatch.

Consolidating into combat was broken under 4th edition when you could assault out of transports, with a guaranteed assault distance, and not have to worry about overwatch. But it'd have a very different effect on the game now.

Personally, consolidating into combat is unnecessary. What would help assault armies though would be the ability to assault from stationary vehicles, and the removal of some of the 6th ed rules which exist solely to screw over assault armies.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:
Personally, consolidating into combat is unnecessary. What would help assault armies though would be the ability to assault from stationary vehicles, and the removal of some of the 6th ed rules which exist solely to screw over assault armies.

This I could agree on is an opponent needed it to play me.

Assaulting out of reserves... I'd let this back, if only when in an assault vehicle, or not deep striking

Assaulting when disembarking... sure, but have to use the 6" move to do it

 Lobukia wrote:

 rabid1903 wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:

 amanita wrote:
We compromised.

If a victorious unit wants to consolidate into another enemy unit, it may try if reaches on a D6" consolidation move. If the enemy unit wants to avoid it, both sides roll a D6; if the victor has the same result or higher it locks another unit in combat. If not, it consolidates normally but can't engage another unit.

This keep some measure of doubt in the assaulting force, and forces the gunlines to spread out a bit.

This isn't a compromise. It's screwing Tau, IG, and 'Crons and giving units of other factions function that they aren't paying for. Why not increase Tau gun range and give Crons 20% more points. That would make as much sense.

I did the math up above of Hammernators charging an equal amount of points of Fire Warriors. It really doesn't break the game if you allow for overwatch.

How about Ork boys assaulting sequential squads of FW. Taking away FW RF and movement for one turn is a huge hit and they gain nothing. Still would have got their overwatch, but they lose out on a turn of use. If all of my units were facing possibly one less turn of shooting and dying earlier than otherwise, you'd be spotting me some serious points before I'd even consider giving you a free pass on being shot at because you think assaults suffer (which they don't).

To others making the realism argument, really?! Ships that fly Master Chiefs and Rambos through hell to serve a corpse while battling hooligan fungus monkeys, giant cockroaches, hippy elves, and anime bots... And you play the realism card? It's plastic soldiers with fantasy in space fluff. I suppose chess doesn't work for you since cavalry doesn't really jump over friendly soldiers and only move at right angles?

Alright, after doing the math with Ork Boyz vs Fire Warriors

30 ork boyz vs 2x9 fire warriors

Same as above, starting 15" away. Assuming charge and consolidation are favorable.

Tau shooting kills 12, 18 boyz remain
Tau overwatch kills 2, 16 boyz remain

Simultaneous swings:
14.2 Tau die (squad eliminated)
1.25 Orks die (15 boyz remain)

Consolidate into the second squad

Tau overwatch kills 2, 13 boyz remain

Simultaneous swings:
6.5 Tau die (2 remain)
1.25 Orks die (11 boyz remain)

Tau flee, most likely caught.

11 boyz remain at the end of the day, two Tau squads are dead.


Now if the boyz started farther away, and the Tau got another shot off this would be a totally different story.

If the boyz had cover, it would end with only 8 boyz.
If the boyz did not have cover, it would end with 6 remaining with a good chance of being locked in combat for another turn.


So in a vacuum, the boyz would pull it off with about 50 points in their favor. This still isn't anything incredibly overpowering. Also it would not be too far-fetched for the Tau to maneuver and get another round of shooting, resulting in the boyz killing off the first squad and dealing half a wound to the second before biting the dust. Therefore, the extra round of shooting turns it into a 90 point favor for the Tau. That actually seems incredibly balanced.

Vaktathi wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Peregrine - then you played a different 4th ed to everyone else. New players, or those who didnt plan ahead, got caught by consolidate into combat.

This is patently false, it wasn't hard to herd units into good consolidation range and in every edition it has often been necessary to place units near each other. This could be mitigated, but even against very experienced players this was not an uncommon scenario.

No, not "patently" false - terrible word misuse there. You are claiming it is false. Big difference. In various UK GTs the vast majority of the time (VAST) if you didnt think ahead you got caught out with this. It was a tactic easily mitigated against by placing with some forethought.

NOt "necessary" but "more advantageous". Again, poor word choice. You took a chance that placing units nearby would give you a greater advantage than the risk of the consolidate to combat

Vaktathi wrote:

You also, conveniently, ignored that it was either a D6" move, so hardly massive, or 3" (depending on how combat ended) - apparently "bubble wrapping" was a term you never managed to think of in 4th ed.

Not every army could take expendable cheap bubble wrap units.

It usually went - turn 2, assault terminators charge, but the Tau player has seen this is perhaps inevitable and pushed a cheap unit out front, leaving no viable way around (so theyre not getting as close as fast) . They assault, smash the unit, are now 7"+ away from the units that could also move and fire, and die next turn. Rinse, repeat

Or the SM's would just blow away the cheap unit with a minimal amount of firepower and clear the way for the terminators to assault...

10 4+ save models is a "minimal" amount of firepower? Have you worked out how many bolters that is? No? Shock.

Vaktathi wrote:

It wasnt "broken", it made assault, one of the 3 phases of the game, actually viable. 5th made it MUCH less so, 6th even less again

It made Assault dominant, not merely viable.

Again, disagree - it made it equal with the other phases. All shooty lists were viable (Tau JSJ shenanigans, as a simple uncounterable example) as were assault lists. Which, given the game is dividied into 3 phases, 2 strictly offensive, is a good thing. 5th detracted from that, generating parking lot lists, and 6th has gone even further away. Assault in 6th is now far, far reduced from 5th, and that is to the detriment of the game as a whole

Yes, it would break the game.

First turn:
Assault terminators charge Fire Warriors and wipe out the unit.
Assault terminators consolidate into combat with crisis suits.

Next turn:
Assault terminators finish off the crisis suits.
Assault terminators charge into combat with broadsides.

Etc.

At no point in this scenario are the assault terminators out of combat and open to being shot, so all the Tau player can do is just pull off models and wait for the game to finally end.

So.....wait..... if we assumed to be adding the "consolidating into close combat" rules back in from 4th ed for my suggestion...your whole army is within 3"/D6" of each other and doesn't shoot the assault terminators before they get into close combat or ever move away from the Terminators or ever use overwatch?? That's what breaks the game?

How are the Terminators in assault range on turn 1? I assume you mean turn 2 or 3. Further, they have to roll high enough to get into combat on that turn. Then they have to eat a round of overwatch. Then they have to roll high enough to catch the crisis suits, and eat another round of overwatch. Then the Tau player has to decide he doesn't want to move his Broadsides out of that 6" threat bubble. Then the Terminators have to roll high enough to catch them, and eat another round of overwatch.

Consolidating into combat was broken under 4th edition when you could assault out of transports, with a guaranteed assault distance, and not have to worry about overwatch. But it'd have a very different effect on the game now.

Exactly.

I still fail to see the OP's statement that the assault rules are broken. Risky? yes, for certain units. Broken? nope.