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.

Orktavius wrote:
Why should your opponent's game be ended the moment an assault unit reaches his lines with no way for him to stop it as it leaps from combat to combat?

Odd,as unless you were new, or hadnt planned ahead, that isnt how 4th went - at all.

Currently shooting a unit until you wipe it out cannot penalise your unit (apart from Gets Hot!) whereas close combat can give you a penalty for doing too well

Doing too well should not confer a penalty, espeically when (unlike in shooting) you cannot choose to "hold back" in close combat - the only way to do so is with careful positioning, something which the removal of the engagement zone in 4th is apparently discouraged by GW

 rabid1903 wrote:

 Davylove21 wrote:
Wouldn't it be a very real worry for a DC squad that they could decimate this squad of Fire Warriors in front of them, but behind them sits a Broadside Team that have been watching the fighting and lining up a barrage should it go inevitably badly for the Fire Warriors?

I could get behind units assaulting directly into another unit after victory if any unit after the first got to overwatch at BS rather than snap shot, that would seem fair to me and in line with the whole 'as reality' line GW seem to be taking.

Honestly this is a compromise I would be ok with. It would at least make it so my assault units would only get shot by one squad instead of several. I'd only agree to it if the squad could not shoot again in their shooting phase if they somehow wiped out the charging squad.

Please forgive typos, written from phone.

It's cool for MEQ or better assault units, but it would be just as bad - if not worse - for Nids. It often only takes one squad shooting to make a Nid unit combat ineffective.

rigeld2 wrote:

 rabid1903 wrote:

 Davylove21 wrote:
Wouldn't it be a very real worry for a DC squad that they could decimate this squad of Fire Warriors in front of them, but behind them sits a Broadside Team that have been watching the fighting and lining up a barrage should it go inevitably badly for the Fire Warriors?

I could get behind units assaulting directly into another unit after victory if any unit after the first got to overwatch at BS rather than snap shot, that would seem fair to me and in line with the whole 'as reality' line GW seem to be taking.

Honestly this is a compromise I would be ok with. It would at least make it so my assault units would only get shot by one squad instead of several. I'd only agree to it if the squad could not shoot again in their shooting phase if they somehow wiped out the charging squad.

Please forgive typos, written from phone.

It's cool for MEQ or better assault units, but it would be just as bad - if not worse - for Nids. It often only takes one squad shooting to make a Nid unit combat ineffective.

I understand that, I play nids. However, this lets me dictate what my opponent will shoot at. Will that broadside team unload on a squad of gaunts, or let them charge in? Either way my Flyrant is safe from that unit for a turn. Just gives me more options besides hoping.

Please forgive typos, sent from my phone.

If you're going to house rule in consolidation into new combat, then I think also allowing true overwatch (not shooting in your shooting phase but being able to fire when an enemy moved into range). I'd run it like Interceptor. A squad can overwatch at full BS, but cannot fire in the next shooting phase (only an option for consolidations toward another unit). I'd think that would be enough to balance the game and yet reward successful assaults, but it would take someplaytesting to know for sure.