Why I think overwatch breaks the game

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.

**vipoid**

Bora77 wrote:
Overwatch makes little sense to me, and believe me my army benefits a lot from it (Eldar).

To balance things it should be:

* Overwatching unit gets lower initiative in following CC

Trouble is, this doesn't affect all defenders equally.

"My Guardsmen lose a point of initiative, how will I cope?"

Bora77 wrote:

* assaulting unit should be able to choose 1 additional attack in CC OR one free snapshot per weapon while charging...

The extra attack doesn't really make sense, and please let's not add more snapshots to the game.

I think Overwatch just needs to be a proper mechanic that requires sacrifice ahead of time. i.e. a unit can forfeit its shooting during its turn, but can then fire at full BS at a single unit that tries to assault it in the subsequent enemy turn. This way it's not a free bonus, and the dice rolled are actually meaningful.

**CrownAxe**

vipoid wrote:
I think Overwatch just needs to be a proper mechanic that requires sacrifice ahead of time. i.e. a unit can forfeit its shooting during its turn, but can then fire at full BS at a single unit that tries to assault it in the subsequent enemy turn. This way it's not a free bonus, and the dice rolled are actually meaningful.

Making it a sacrifice is terrible and makes overwatch a useless mechanic. If I have to give up all my shooting just to get it back at most the same amount of shooting (because i'll take shooting casualties before overwatch) when assaulted why would I not just shoot normally in the first place? Plus what happens if the unit I withheld shooting from doesn't get assaulted (because I withheld shooting so he knows who not to charge) and did no shooting what so ever.

**ClassicCarraway**

A better sacrifice would be to make the overwatching unit strike last in combat.

**vipoid**

CrownAxe wrote:

Making it a sacrifice is terrible and makes overwatch a useless mechanic.

Well it's not exactly winning any good-mechanic awards right now, either.

CrownAxe wrote:
If I have to give up all my shooting just to get it back at most the same amount of shooting (because i'll take shooting casualties before overwatch) when assaulted why would I not just shoot normally in the first place?

- Because you can't actually see the unit that's going to assault you.
- Because it's in cover and will have an excellent save against your weapons.
- Because most of your unit's weapons are currently out of range.

Also, it's far from guaranteed that you'll take shooting casualties before overwatch. There are many situations where an opponent won't risk shooting you, for fear of putting himself out of assault range. And, if he does, then he's taking the aforementioned risk.

CrownAxe wrote:
Plus what happens if the unit I withheld shooting from doesn't get assaulted (because I withheld shooting so he knows who not to charge) and did no shooting what so ever.

Then you don't get to shoot and don't get charged either.

I mean, gee, it's almost like you'd have to think about the decision. What a terrifying thought that must be.

Regardless, here's my question - let's say that you had to give up your shooting phase to make use of Overwatch in the enemy turn. What bonus would you want to make it worthwhile?

**CrownAxe**

vipoid wrote:
I mean, gee, it's almost like you'd have to think about the decision. What a terrifying thought that must be.

The problem is your change still doesn't actually give you a real decision to make.

Can I shoot the unit? Yes? then shoot. No? then hold for overwatch. Its blatantly obvious what your choice should be in every situation. That's an illusion of choice and doesn't add to good gameplay.

If you want to make overwatch better then make it have an actually effect instead of just extra casualties such as reducing the charging units initiative or something. Then the choice is trading damage for an effect as opposed to "which way gives me the most shooting"

**vipoid**

CrownAxe wrote:

The problem is your change still doesn't actually give you a real decision to make.

Can I shoot the unit? Yes? then shoot. No? then hold for overwatch. Its blatantly obvious what your choice should be in every situation. That's an illusion of choice and doesn't add to good gameplay.

A fair point, but I still think it would be better than the current mechanic - which requires no decision, or thought whatsoever.

CrownAxe wrote:

If you want to make overwatch better then make it have an actually effect instead of just extra casualties such as reducing the charging units initiative or something. Then the choice is trading damage for an effect as opposed to "which way gives me the most shooting"

I don't want to necessarily make overwatch better, I want to make it different in two ways: Firstly, I'd like it to be a tactical decision with some potential downsides, rather than just an automatic effect. Second, I want to remove this stupid snapshot gambling crap from it (and, ideally, the rest of the game as well).

**urbanevil**

We wrote:
So the Op learned a lesson I learned one time, running a lone character into a squad can be deadly.

I had a libraian that had his squad killed off so he ran into a Devastator squad. (Yea lots of marine vs marine training missions in my meta). So one of the las conanons rolled a 6 on overwatch. Ok kind of makes sense, not a smart thing to do being that lone guy charging a bunch of guys with guns. SO I won't make that mistake again.

If you have a character that can survive by themselves than fine (ie. Avatar of Khaine, greater demon) but now I know (and you know) not to do that again.

This guys librarians hurt, i can attest lol.

**CrownAxe**

That's what my suggestion was. Overwatch providing an effect instead of shooting. And you can still forgo shooting to do it (though i'd just make it snapshots instead of completely forging shooting). That way you actually have a choice of trading damage for a special effect.

**TheSilo**

vipoid wrote:
Bora77 wrote:
Overwatch makes little sense to me, and believe me my army benefits a lot from it (Eldar).

To balance things it should be:

* Overwatching unit gets lower initiative in following CC

Trouble is, this doesn't affect all defenders equally.

"My Guardsmen lose a point of initiative, how will I cope?"

Bora77 wrote:

* assaulting unit should be able to choose 1 additional attack in CC OR one free snapshot per weapon while charging...

The extra attack doesn't really make sense, and please let's not add more snapshots to the game.

I think Overwatch just needs to be a proper mechanic that requires sacrifice ahead of time. i.e. a unit can forfeit its shooting during its turn, but can then fire at full BS at a single unit that tries to assault it in the subsequent enemy turn. This way it's not a free bonus, and the dice rolled are actually meaningful.

I totally agree with Vipoid, it needs to be a decision with sacrifice. Allow a unit to forgo shooting in exchange for overwatch at +1 BS. This ensures that the charging unit will get shredded if they charge a well prepared squad. But on the other hand, it's a risky decision to forgo shooting for that bonus. The benefit to overwatch is that your unit will be firing at close range for all its rapid fire, template, and short range weapons.

I think this'd be a much sleeker mechanic, without all the time wasted on snap shots.

**Goatseer**

I think its a pointless rule. It slows down the game a bit, for usually no result. and if it does kill a model or two, the charger will probably be annoyed (and rightfully so).

Assault should be better, so there is no need to have such a pointless rule.

The fact that it doesn't scale, like the OP pointed out, is also annoying.

**CrownAxe**

Overwatch does serve a purpose of giving shooting armies a way to deal with assault units that disengage in the shooting player's turn thus being unshootable normally.

**vipoid**

CrownAxe wrote:
Overwatch does serve a purpose of giving shooting armies a way to deal with assault units that disengage in the shooting player's turn thus being unshootable normally.

In that case, can we scrap overwatch and instead add mechanics for shooting in and into combat?

Then we also wouldn't have this:

Andilus Greatsword wrote:
"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"

**Antario**

Rather than overwatch alone, I feel the combo of random charge ranges, assault in to cover, casualties taken from the front and overwatch is hurting the game. It invalidates too many assault units.