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.

While I never got to play Rouge Trader and never had 2nd edition, I find I wished sometimes Movement stats were back in 40K. I like the idea of some units are faster than others. It could make up for a mini being weak in power, weak in defence but fast in movement.

It would for me at least make vehicles more meaningful. The speeds of vehicles just doesn't seem right to me in 40K. I liked when I use to play Lord of the Rings, they had movement stats in and added a bit more flavour to the game.

So I am curious as to what Dakka think. Would you like Movement stats for the minis?

Yep, I am a fan of movement stats. Even if there was light, medium and fast movement stats (I.E Light moves 8", medium moves 6" and heavy moves 4" or something).

Yes I agree.

I agree with you.

The dropping of the movement stat is one of the biggest "wtf" moments I've had with GW's rules development.

Not having a movement characteristic just complicates the core rules so much, you have to have tables telling you how fast things moves, you have to have special rules that increase the movement of units that should move faster than normal or special rules to reduce the movement of units that are naturally slower.

A movement stat just makes the game simpler and more logical. No idea why it was removed. An extra column for a movement characteristic measured in inches or cm would be awesome.

They already exist through unit types.

If you're suggesting that "Infantry" suddenly starts moving between 4"-6" depending in a M stat, then no, there are many things I think could be revisited from earlier versions, but that is a whole load of extra bloat for a limited amount of difference in-game.

Considering that overwatch, the movement stat, and psychic phases were last seen in 2nd Ed, and that two of those three have been returned to us (an edition at a time) I think it is highly possible that GW will return the movement stat to the game in the upcomming 8th edition.

I mean, it's either bring back the movement stat or bring back Squats and we all know that ain't happening.

It'd be in interesting to see a movement stat, especially with the variable objectives we have now making speed (or lack thereof) important. Really, you'd just need to give everything with SNP a 4" move, 6" for normal units, and 8" for anything with fleet or any kind of eldar and it would work, but you'd need to tweak a few costs to balance it.

 Azreal13 wrote:
They already exist through unit types.

If you're suggesting that "Infantry" suddenly starts moving between 4"-6" depending in a M stat, then no, there are many things I think could be revisited from earlier versions, but that is a whole load of extra bloat for a limited amount of difference in-game.

With movement stats you could drop running rolls and even drop difficult terrain rolls. As units that are faster will already have a bonus and randomness wont be needed.

If terrain was minus 2" to movement for example, then fast units will be slowed down in difficult, but still remain faster than slower infantry types.

I think it would eliminate more annoying rules and create a properly streamlined phase.

Heck, things like slow and purposeful etc can even be incorporated into slower units etc

It keeps everything categorized and if done right can reduce a lot of rolling.

I dissagree for three reasons:

1 - In a game cluttered i with extra rules (i.e. rolling a D3 for a stomp attack then a D6 to see what the stomp is) the last thing we need is more tables.

2- Units are already penalized for moving as is evidence in weapon profiles ( i.e. salvo and heavy weapons) most normal units have to remain in place to utilize thier firepower potential output.

3- Rules already exist to enable units to move quickly such as for the eldar move-shoot-run.

However, with that being said I do conseed the point that they could possibly remove more rules than would replace them if they did a sweeping revision. The question is will GW do such a "MOVEMENT REVISION" as they did with the magic phase that essentially exist now.

I'm pretty sure adding a movement characteristic would remove more clutter than it adds (in the form of less tables, less special rules, less having to explain for each different unit type how fast it moves and exceptions to that).

 Paradigm wrote:
It'd be in interesting to see a movement stat, especially with the variable objectives we have now making speed (or lack thereof) important. Really, you'd just need to give everything with SNP a 4" move, 6" for normal units, and 8" for anything with fleet or any kind of eldar and it would work, but you'd need to tweak a few costs to balance it.

Would a 2" difference between average units and units with fleet make enough of a difference on the tabletop? Shouldn't fleet units have a +4" increase over whatever the baseline movement stat is?

To be honest, I preferred the whole turn structure of 2nd edition better. Move in the "movement phase" according to your movement characteristic. Shoot in the "shooting phase" rather than the shooting phase being another excuse to move. Fight close combat in the "close combat phase" (so if you wanted to assault, you would have charged during the movement phase rather than the close combat phase).

It'd also make life simpler for horde armies, not having 3 opportunities to move each turn.

squidhills wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
It'd be in interesting to see a movement stat, especially with the variable objectives we have now making speed (or lack thereof) important. Really, you'd just need to give everything with SNP a 4" move, 6" for normal units, and 8" for anything with fleet or any kind of eldar and it would work, but you'd need to tweak a few costs to balance it.

Would a 2" difference between average units and units with fleet make enough of a difference on the tabletop? Shouldn't fleet units have a +4" increase over whatever the baseline movement stat is?

I can't see infantry moving more than 8", to be honest. It would be enough to matter over the course of the game (2" a turn for 5 turns is nearly two extra movement phases) without making them vehicke-fast. Maybe the 2" extra and keep the rerollable run?

I think moving is fine as it is. There are bigger problems....apparently.

Different movement stats for charging would be a good start. The fact that a grot has the same odds as a model on a bike of making it into combat is insane.

In fantasy, you move by looking at your movement speed on the unit and then double it if you want to run/march.

In 40k, you lookup the move value for your unit type, roll a d6 to run, maybe reroll that d6 if you have fleet or turbo-boost if you are a bike and then another 2d6 in the assault phase for jetpack infantry. Then for vehicles you lookup if you can move either 6 or 12, then another 6 inches for flatout, unless you a walker who rolls a d6 or a fast vehicle who moves 12 unless you are also a skimmer in which case you go 18. Finally you have flyers, superheavy flyers, flying monstrous creatures and flying gargantuan creatures featuring minimum movement distances and limited pivots.

Its bizarre that GW actually has a better set of movement rules they have used for years and yet continues with the mess that is movement in 40k.

GW has the same movement rules in Fantasy as it had in 40K in 2nd Edition.

The current 40K base movement rules are fine, but I do agree that less rolling for difficult terrain, running etc might be better, and I'd much prefer charging to have at least a fixed component.

Different movement stats work for warmahordes and infinity...

Should do for 40k

Not in 40k as it stands now, but in theory yes. Movement stats were fine, and added some tactical depth. Really though, 40k's entire turn stuff is outdated and clunky now. For instance, you shouldn't need to "Assault" to engage something in combat, you should either be able to charge it (getting a bonus if so) or advance into base to base. Assault troops could get something like a bonus to charging, or just faster movement in general. However that might make assault overpowering again (imagine something with movement of 8 or 12!).

WayneTheGame wrote:
Not in 40k as it stands now, but in theory yes. Movement stats were fine, and added some tactical depth. Really though, 40k's entire turn stuff is outdated and clunky now. For instance, you shouldn't need to "Assault" to engage something in combat, you should either be able to charge it (getting a bonus if so) or advance into base to base. Assault troops could get something like a bonus to charging, or just faster movement in general. However that might make assault overpowering again (imagine something with movement of 8 or 12!).

I like the way you call the current system outdated and clunky but what you propose is more similar to the 2nd edition system of movement from 16 years ago, lol.

But yeah, I haven't liked 40k's movement system since I first read it when 3rd edition was released.

I think they just need to eliminate the random aspects of moving, cover is a flat -2" including for bikes and cavalry, running is a flat 4". Move through cover ignores the modifier, get rid of skilled riders (it's the same thing as mtc). Fleet adds 2" to runs, get rid of crusader.

Rolling for cover and run moves just slows the game down, without improving the experience.

For vehicles, move 6", 12", or 18" (heavy, medium, fast). Fire all weapons when stationary. Always fire one weapon at full BS when moving. Heavy fires all weapons at full BS. Skimmer fires +1 weapon at full BS

I'd say no to movement stats. They're a decent idea, but you'd have to reconstruct so much of the game to make it work correctly.

I mean, already slow armies are unduly penalized and fast armies are extra-buffed. There's no way to add movement stats in the game as it is without making this problem worse. I mean, think about it - does your slugga tide need to move more slowly? Do eldar jetbikes need to move faster? There's no elegant way to handle this.

That is, of course, without rewriting everything. As it is, faster makes you more durable, but if you made it so that faster was LESS durable, and so you made it a real tradeoff, then sure, why not have units that get a boost to speed? Conversely, I could see a tradeoff between getting into close combat sooner but you take more casualties or have more risk along the way, or getting there more slowly, but more securely.

40k, as it is, has no way of doing that, though.

No movement stat make sense in a modern/historical wargame where different classes move at the same predefined speed (infantry, light vehicles, heavy vehicles, light cavalry, heavy cavalry).

It doesn't make much sense in a game overrun with a dozen distinct alien races.

It's absolutely barmy in a game where nearly every single unit seems to have a special rule regarding their speed, which is further complicated when those special rules encounter terrain and with movement split over multiple phases.

A movement stat would significantly simplify the game while retaining all individual character (if not allowing more character by allowing greater variety and/or unique special rules).

 Ailaros wrote:
I'd say no to movement stats. They're a decent idea, but you'd have to reconstruct so much of the game to make it work correctly.

At this point I feel there's so much that needs to be reconstructed in 40k I'd be happy to see GW pull another 3rd edition where they just forget all the old codices and start again working from the ground up.

Won't happen, but I'd like to see it.

Ugh, making the rules even more clunky? No.

I'm an oldhammer kind of guy, I probably read pre-3rd edition stuff at least twice as often as I do modern stuff. That said the old movement rules are NOT something I miss. There's nothing more banal than having to work out to the quarter inch just how fast a specific model can advance through a bit of terrain.

 Gashrog wrote:
I'm an oldhammer kind of guy, I probably read pre-3rd edition stuff at least twice as often as I do modern stuff. That said the old movement rules are NOT something I miss. There's nothing more banal than having to work out to the quarter inch just how fast a specific model can advance through a bit of terrain.

If that's your only complaint about the 2nd edition movement that's really not a big problem to either live with or fix.

If initiative affected movement that would be cool

 Sigvatr wrote:
Ugh, making the rules even more clunky? No.

A movement stat would be simpler than the current glut of special rules.

 changerofways wrote:
If initiative affected movement that would be cool

I'd rather just have a separate characteristic. Initiative is more how fast you can react rather than how fast you can cover ground. Things that can cover ground quickly are often things that are fast to react, but there's certain things that have higher initiative (characters for example) that I don't think would be terribly faster at covering ground while other things have low initiative because they're slow to react (Carnifex) but I imagine they are quite capable of charging quickly across the battlefield.

Daedleh wrote:A movement stat would be simpler than the current glut of special rules.

?

Such as?