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.

before you start each game, your opponent gets to know every unit and weapon you're fielding. sure, they don't exactly know where each unit will end up (though they will before turn 1) and they don't know exactly where or when units in reserve will arrive, but they know they're coming and can start planning for it from the moment the game starts. there's no such thing as a hidden unit. infiltration and stealth just let you start closer to the enemy, but the enemy still knows you're there. why is there no element of surprise in 40k?

I can see how surprise could be abused by people trying to alter their list on the sly, but say you come up with rules to mitigate that. like, requiring your whole list to be written down on paper before the game starts and then revealing portions of it to your opponent each time they discover one of your units (either because it started on the table or because it just jumped out of the bushes behind them). given that, why not allow for truly hidden units? the fluff certainly supports the idea, as does historical warfare. is there a game mechanics reason to exclude surprise? is this lack of a surprise element common to other war games or just a GW thing?

I'm not saying 40k is broken or anything (not due to the lack of surprise, at least :p), but it's just something I've always wondered about ever since reading the rules for stealth and infiltration; very much not what I was expecting

Ok tell me if I'm misunderstanding this.

Closed lists written in advance, and keep your model case facing away, so that you deploy a few units, but whatever you have in reserve is a mystery until it arrives.

I've played like that before, it can be fun, but it could be abused a lot more in 5th than in 6th. I should try it again in the new rules.

It's not easy, and it's not user friendly.

Further, many groups don't bother showing and checking lists. I played against two people yesterday, and nobody showed anybody their lists. And we generally don't, unless an issue arises in game and something needs to be referred to. We only have one 'problem player', so none of us feel compelled to check each others lists before the game starts.

This is the type of thing you can easily do amongst friends, but with randoms at the LGS you're asking for trouble really.

While it may be realistic and introduce a fun element into the game it opens the door for cheating.

*rolls dice, gets a 4.

"Ok, my 10 man squad of Assault Terminators have just arrived from reserves in time to save the day!"

Given how few people play fully WYSIWYG going over lists before the game begins is pretty much mandatory, even ignoring the cheating issue.

We usually just go through and point out any odd combinations or specific loadouts that may need explanation. I don't think I've ever played a game where I had an actual list in my hand. I just put it together in battlescribe and then remember what's going on the board. I explain what my Cryptek and Lord have going for them...everything else is pretty self-explanatory.

We rarely actually look at each other's lists, but they are always there.

 motyak wrote:
Ok tell me if I'm misunderstanding this.

Closed lists written in advance, and keep your model case facing away, so that you deploy a few units, but whatever you have in reserve is a mystery until it arrives.

I've played like that before, it can be fun, but it could be abused a lot more in 5th than in 6th. I should try it again in the new rules.

that would be one part of it, yeah. the other part would be the ability to move hidden units around on the board. this part would definitely take some crafty rules to prevent abuse. maybe you represent hidden units with a simple counter or something and then that's all your opponent knows about it until the unit is somehow revealed (it attacks, some wargear the opponent has allows detection, the unit fails a stealth check of some sort, etc.). similar to the way mysterious terrain works, maybe.

I definitely hear everyone that says it would only work among friends. any game element that allows you to keep details from your opponent has the potential for abuse by TFGs. it's not a perfect world could always be done up as an optional ruleset or something. which, I guess, is the very definition of a house rule...

If you and your mates are into giving homemade rules a go, then you should try it, write it together during one gaming session and then use it in the next or something, it could be good fun. But don't expect anyone else to want to play with it unless they join your close group, or are very open minded

 Kaldor wrote:
Further, many groups don't bother showing and checking lists. I played against two people yesterday, and nobody showed anybody their lists. And we generally don't, unless an issue arises in game and something needs to be referred to. We only have one 'problem player', so none of us feel compelled to check each others lists before the game starts.

It's a bit like that yeah. I've never played a game where we've spent time reading one another's lists beforehand. At most it's a "What did you bring" "Some Termies, some Scouts, those two Predators, and those guys are in a Drop Pod" "Ok cool" and that's as far as it goes.

Never saw the need for complete secrecy, nor do I think you really need to know everything about your opponent's list before the game begins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 varl wrote:
that would be one part of it, yeah. the other part would be the ability to move hidden units around on the board. this part would definitely take some crafty rules to prevent abuse. maybe you represent hidden units with a simple counter or something and then that's all your opponent knows about it until the unit is somehow revealed (it attacks, some wargear the opponent has allows detection, the unit fails a stealth check of some sort, etc.). similar to the way mysterious terrain works, maybe.

You're essentially talking about 'double blind' rules, where neither player knows where the opposing forces are. Works better with a third party.

The real problem with this is that both players are omniscient. They have a full understanding of the battlefield, while real soldiers would not. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to get around this, really, which is why games like 40k are forced to rely on a randomized mechanic.

If you made things really opaque, then the game would quickly devolve into an RPG, where people told stories regardless of there being a proper strategy game involved.

Probably the closest I've seen secrecy done properly is with Rules of Engagement. In that system there are a few dozen primary and secondary objectives, and you roll randomly to see which one each player gets. As such, the two different players are kind of playing two different games. That said, there's still not very much secrecy.

In the end, you want to have a balanced game, and secrecy tends to make things unbalanced. Just ask the barbarians of the Teutenburg Forest.

 Ailaros wrote:
In the end, you want to have a balanced game, and secrecy tends to make things unbalanced. Just ask the barbarians of the Teutenburg Forest.

Varus, give my back my legions!

I could see working in a tournement where your fighting in a ruined hive and your allowed to hide one unit in some ruins somewhere. Before the game starts you submit to a third party where they are and as the game goes along each turn you have to pass a roll to avoid detection.

Something like you failed your roll and the heat signiture of your Preditor was detected or one of your guys was seen poking his head round the corner now place your unit on the table. That would be cool plus the third party would cut down on the cheating and stop people from replacing the unit with another more suited to a situation.

Chuck Norris doesn't believe in the Periodic Table of Elements.....only in the element of surprise.

Steven Segal just comes up to your face and asks you nicely to fek off. If that don't work he tells you what he's guna do to you, and while your wondering if he still has it in him he rips out your throat road house style.

Steven Segal would have to put the donuts and double-wide slice of 3-layer cake down first...

As for secrecy, I'm against it. We did play one game were we showed each other our lists, but didn't indicate what was in each transport. Just put down a piece of paper inside each rhino or upside down on the vendetta base then would reveal it when the unit disembarked or the transport was destroyed. It was different, but not something I'd want to do all of the time.

I played a fun game like that once. There's usually a lot of people in my FLGS and not nearly enough tables for everyone, so a lot of people just watch other people play. My friend and I both wrote up a list, had someone else check it, and then started playing.
It was a lot of fun when I used Huron Blackheart's Warlord trait to infiltrate a squad of Thousand Sons into a small building by his side and suddenly a rhino appeared in the middle of the board. Because the Alpha Legion was there the entire time.

There was some confusion about who had what upgrades and all that, but since it was a friendly game we didn't get into a huge fight. I'm not sure how well it'd work against someone that you're not really friends with, but it might be worth a shot.

Me and my group of friends have been playing over 20 years and this is the only way we've ever really played: we create lists and they are put at the side of the table as deployment begins, but we rarely if ever look at them, and our boxes are always turned so the other player can't see them. On the day we arrange the game we state which armies we are going to play and the points value, and the rest remains unknown until it hits the table. I have NEVER played in a shop or tournament though i assume this really wouldn't work unless it was a close-knit group of friends/regular players like us.

Still, it has led to some pretty awesome surprises in games, like the time one of the guys brought a Warhound out of his bag in a 4000 points a side battle (Non apocalypse game), that he had bought and spent 3 months building and painting, while struggling to hide the fact! It was an awesome surprise, but was unsurprisingly decimated within a couple of rounds

In my group we dont normally bother sharing lists. We seem to have fallen into a system of "dont ask, dont tell".

We are more than happy to give all the details about who is where and in what etc etc - but not if you dont ask.

But then we are all good friends and trust each other not to cheat.

I like this idea a lot, simply because it requiters a lot more strategy, People would need to think twice before they make moves, would allow for a lot more elaborate tactics, such as using combat tactics to draw enemy troops in then strike at them with assault terminators or assault marines.

Also your enemy wont know what you are launching. I like the idea a lot

One thing that I have seen done is to put a screen accross no-mans land so you can't see your opponent deploying.

I really like some of these ideas. i would multi-quote but I still don't have it down yet. I am but a lowly n00b on the forums.

1. I like the idea of not knowing what your facing. Why should you? Its battle, battles are random.

2. The screen/wall up so your buddy can't see you deploying. i.e. deploying simultaneously

3. Terrain that is not in the Rulebook, We use a lot of burning buildings, fire makes smoke, smoke obscures LOS.

With friends maybe but you should always have a list printed out anyway. hell even for your own reference. I just dont see it being possible since we are playing as the overhead viewers

Yeah, I'm not too big on list secrecy myself. Especially in a world of imperfect wysiwyg. Or, well, blatant disregard thereof, as happens to be the case at my FLGS.

I still bring lists and offer them to my opponent. That said, we're starting to get to the point amongst some of our regulars where we kind of need to only skim over each other's lists. Yes, I'm showing up with 95 infantry models chalk full of lascannons an meltas. Oh, you're bringing your two barge lords and three fliers again?

Often what I do is give my opponent my list, and then say that it's the same list that I usually bring, but point out the changes.

In any case, winning a game by my opponent not understanding my list cheapens the victory, in my opinion.

ask and ye shall receive, it would seem. FW just released updated zone mortalis rules and they've included an optional rule called Enemy Unknown that models the element of surprise pretty close to how I was imagining. it's as if the FW designers read dakka or something :p

 Peregrine wrote:
Given how few people play fully WYSIWYG going over lists before the game begins is pretty much mandatory, even ignoring the cheating issue.

Really? We ALWAYS play WYSIWYG, unless somonee is proxing to try a new unit and then you only need to see the stats and get info on that proxied unit, not the whole army list. We pretty much require WYSIWYG in our games so it generally isn't an issue. Anyone who's force is so *not* WYSIWYG I will not play with anyway. Once they pass a single unit with the "and this is an ML, and that is really a heavy bolter", I politely tell them to find another opponent and look for another myself.

To the OP, Double-blind player secrecy is generally hard to pull off without more than just the basic two players. Someone else needs to be there to keep track of things, and there is also the aspect of moving "hidden" units that is difficult as well. We toyed with hidden units at one point using something akin to the contact tokens in Space Hulk. Some were marked with units and others marked with nothing to keep the element of surprise there so even focusing on the tokens didn't guarantee you'd find an enemy unit. Usually required a line of sight and sometimes limited to the longest range weapon in the unit/on the vehicle to determine if you could figure out what a given item was. We also tried a method of rolling to determine what a contact was with varying levels of success from no information, to its likely unit type (infantry, walker, vehicle) all the way up to finally seeing exactly what it is. Made things harder to control as a general because you had to first determine what was in the opposing force, and then divert the right forces to deal with it. It was definitely a fun way to play, but it did have some drawbacks in making the games longer to some degree as you worked to figure out what you were facing. By the same token only moving tokens instead of moving full units of minis speeded earlier turns up somewhat as well. Scary moments would be when your scout or other light infantry platoon discovered a monstrous creature when WAY too close to the critter...always good for some laughs.

The key, though, is if you and your opponent want to try it then go for it. Make it up, give it a whirl and have fun with it. Just realize when you hit the local game store it is back to business as usual.

Skriker