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 wrote:
Perhaps part of the problem is that there aren't many real options in terms of gameplay.

Sure, there are a lot of options in terms of list building (even if a good chunk are false-options), but in-game what can infantry really do?

- Move
- Shoot
- Charge
- Go to Ground

That's about it. But, for all the endless dice-rolling, could there not be more in the way of options?

e.g. what if, instead of just diving for cover, infantry could choose to entrench themselves - maybe sacrificing a turn of shooting to gain +1 cover until they move.

Similarly, why does splitting a unit's fire require a special rule? Especially since we're now firing one weapon type at a time anyway. It just seems like something squads should be able to do anyway. Hell, I'm confused about why it required a Ld test. I mean, let's say you have a unit of guardsmen with some Lascannon HWTs. There is a mob of orks bearing down on you, but your commander decides that destroying a battlewagon in the distance is more important - and so orders the lascannons to open fire on it. So, why wouldn't the rest of the guardsmen shoot the oncoming orks? Their weapons can't hurt the battlewagon, but they can certainly hurt the orks. And, really, I think it would require a passed Ld test to *not* shoot those orks.

And, on that note, why is combat a black-hole that warps time and space? Units that shoot and then stop to fight move several times the distance of those that just run. You can't shoot into combat for fear if hitting a friendly unit - even though a) the opponent is a Wraithknight and the squad doesn't even reach its ankles, b) this is done all the time in the fluff and c) hitting your own unit is often still better than the fate which would otherwise await it. Which is kinder - potentially shooting friendly guardsmen with lasguns in a bid to save them, or leaving them at the mercy of a Haemonculus and his pet Grotesques?

*shrugs*

It just feels to me like this game is padded in the wrong places. in particular, it has a ton of dice-rolling in place of any actual options (or even logic).

I'm in this camp, but I think the idea of Infantry having specialities that make them a ton more worthwhile than other units in the same situation wouldn't sit well with GW, and a good portion of the hobby... Because, you know, Riptides.

I mostly just dislike the combat rules. It's the same thing that I describe in my sig - It's just another rule for something that didn't need to be like that. Just have the rules for combat be "You can attack and hit enemies within 2'' of your squad, regardless of the placement of the models" and "Recieving unit takes casulties from the back, the fartherst enemy being removed first, representing models moving into close combat over their dead comrades"... Or at least just make WS use the BS table. I freaking HATE the WS system, just for being convoluted where it shouldn't be. I mean, we don't test for enemy units in the Shooting Phase being able to fire back, then hitting each other at the same time?!

Or, at the very least just make Charging 8'', 10'' for Fleet and Crusaders and call it a freaking day.

The game is complex in all the wrong ways yet is still shallow game-wise.

 MWHistorian wrote:
The game is complex in all the wrong ways yet is still shallow game-wise.

This.

 MWHistorian wrote:
The game is complex in all the wrong ways yet is still shallow game-wise.

That's the core of the problem. List building, balance, plethora of armies aside, once you hit the table the player's choices don't make enough difference. Positioning is almost irrelevant since EW missions only score on the final turn and most Maelstrom objectives are just "kill x" or "kill with y". Most heavy weapons have enough range to hit everything on the entire table, and most models are just as durable in the open as they are in cover. And warlord traits and psychic powers, which should be a good way for a player's personality to shine on the table, are generated randomly, making it impossible to build a list that makes good use of the traits and powers.

Yet there's so much complexity about trivial issues, and this is where most of the rules questions/disputes pop up:
- Transport disembarkation (we have to look up the rules every single time).
- Unit type distinctions (jump versus jet troops, seriously?) that could be avoided by just using movement stats and profile changes.
- Rules that add complexity/time without adding meaningful content (lasgun arrays, heavy weapons teams, snapshots, most overwatch)

 TheSilo wrote:

Yet there's so much complexity about trivial issues, and this is where most of the rules questions/disputes pop up:
- Transport disembarkation (we have to look up the rules every single time).
- Unit type distinctions (jump versus jet troops, seriously?) that could be avoided by just using movement stats and profile changes.
- Rules that add complexity/time without adding meaningful content (lasgun arrays, heavy weapons teams, snapshots, most overwatch)

Seriously, all disembarkation is is move 6" from the door, why you have to look this up I do not know.
Overwatch makes sense and adds to the game.
That is all.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Overwatch makes sense and adds to the game.

It adds a lot of *time* to the game, that's for sure.

 MWHistorian wrote:
The game is complex in all the wrong ways yet is still shallow game-wise.

Exalted for great truth.

 vipoid wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Overwatch makes sense and adds to the game.

It adds a lot of *time* to the game, that's for sure.

Yes and it can make the difference in a charge going off, or them making the charge but not winning the combat, and having a big impact on the game

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Overwatch makes sense and adds to the game.

It adds a lot of *time* to the game, that's for sure.

Yes and it can make the difference in a charge going off, or them making the charge but not winning the combat, and having a big impact on the game

My fix for overwatch:

- Rapid fire, salvo, and heavy weapons cannot overwatch.

- Pistols and Assault weapons fire overwatch at -1 BS.

No more buckets of rapid fire shots wasting everyone's time. 40k's absurdly overpriced pistols now have a function in defending against assaults (seriously why do plasma pistols and plasma guns both cost 15 points?). And I like the picture of a commissar shooting down charging enemies with his bolt pistol. And the game's short-range assault weapons now get more action than the melta gun's 1-shot and then you're dead next turn. It's presumed that assault weapons are more easily brought to bear (hence why they can move and shoot and assault) so it only makes sense that they're easier to use in a defensive capacity.

 Peregrine wrote:
"Getting" would imply that it isn't well past that point already.

This. A thousand times this.

I mean, I had problems with the bloat in 6th Ed, but 7th has just shunted it into overdrive.

As a big fan of efficiency, the current state of 40K is downright maddening!

 TheSilo wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Overwatch makes sense and adds to the game.

It adds a lot of *time* to the game, that's for sure.

Yes and it can make the difference in a charge going off, or them making the charge but not winning the combat, and having a big impact on the game

My fix for overwatch:

- Rapid fire, salvo, and heavy weapons cannot overwatch.

- Pistols and Assault weapons fire overwatch at -1 BS.

No more buckets of rapid fire shots wasting everyone's time. 40k's absurdly overpriced pistols now have a function in defending against assaults (seriously why do plasma pistols and plasma guns both cost 15 points?). And I like the picture of a commissar shooting down charging enemies with his bolt pistol. And the game's short-range assault weapons now get more action than the melta gun's 1-shot and then you're dead next turn. It's presumed that assault weapons are more easily brought to bear (hence why they can move and shoot and assault) so it only makes sense that they're easier to use in a defensive capacity.

Heavy? Fine. But Salvo and Rapid Fire? Why? Guess what, if you charge a bunch of troops with M-16's? They're gonna rapid fire the hell out of you. Why the hell would you get rid of Rapid Fire and Salvo?

 jreilly89 wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Overwatch makes sense and adds to the game.

It adds a lot of *time* to the game, that's for sure.

Yes and it can make the difference in a charge going off, or them making the charge but not winning the combat, and having a big impact on the game

My fix for overwatch:

- Rapid fire, salvo, and heavy weapons cannot overwatch.

- Pistols and Assault weapons fire overwatch at -1 BS.

No more buckets of rapid fire shots wasting everyone's time. 40k's absurdly overpriced pistols now have a function in defending against assaults (seriously why do plasma pistols and plasma guns both cost 15 points?). And I like the picture of a commissar shooting down charging enemies with his bolt pistol. And the game's short-range assault weapons now get more action than the melta gun's 1-shot and then you're dead next turn. It's presumed that assault weapons are more easily brought to bear (hence why they can move and shoot and assault) so it only makes sense that they're easier to use in a defensive capacity.

Heavy? Fine. But Salvo and Rapid Fire? Why? Guess what, if you charge a bunch of troops with M-16's? They're gonna rapid fire the hell out of you. Why the hell would you get rid of Rapid Fire and Salvo?

Simply because rolling overwatch with a million rapid fire weapons at BS1 is a complete and utter waste of everyone's time. Again, it's not like getting charged is a big surprise. Your opportunity to shoot the approaching enemy is already in the game, it's called the "shooting phase". Overwatch should simply be the last minute swing of your gun to face down a charging foe, primarily for the short ranged pistols and assault weapons that don't often have the chance to shoot at long range.

 TheSilo wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Overwatch makes sense and adds to the game.

It adds a lot of *time* to the game, that's for sure.

Yes and it can make the difference in a charge going off, or them making the charge but not winning the combat, and having a big impact on the game

My fix for overwatch:

- Rapid fire, salvo, and heavy weapons cannot overwatch.

- Pistols and Assault weapons fire overwatch at -1 BS.

No more buckets of rapid fire shots wasting everyone's time. 40k's absurdly overpriced pistols now have a function in defending against assaults (seriously why do plasma pistols and plasma guns both cost 15 points?). And I like the picture of a commissar shooting down charging enemies with his bolt pistol. And the game's short-range assault weapons now get more action than the melta gun's 1-shot and then you're dead next turn. It's presumed that assault weapons are more easily brought to bear (hence why they can move and shoot and assault) so it only makes sense that they're easier to use in a defensive capacity.

Heavy? Fine. But Salvo and Rapid Fire? Why? Guess what, if you charge a bunch of troops with M-16's? They're gonna rapid fire the hell out of you. Why the hell would you get rid of Rapid Fire and Salvo?

Simply because rolling overwatch with a million rapid fire weapons at BS1 is a complete and utter waste of everyone's time. Again, it's not like getting charged is a big surprise. Your opportunity to shoot the approaching enemy is already in the game, it's called the "shooting phase". Overwatch should simply be the last minute swing of your gun to face down a charging foe, primarily for the short ranged pistols and assault weapons that don't often have the chance to shoot at long range.

Overwatch is BS1 and it's meant to simulate that last minute spray of fire. I've had charges denied and denied others because of Overwatch; its a key mechanic of the game. Tau especially use it.

Also, how does it add up time? It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Done.

 jreilly89 wrote:

Also, how does it add up time? It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Done.

It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Than it takes weeks of lamenting on the forums. So, it IS time consuming.

 koooaei wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

Also, how does it add up time? It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Done.

It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Than it takes weeks of lamenting on the forums. So, it IS time consuming.

Got me, I laughed. Bravo

 jreilly89 wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

Also, how does it add up time? It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Done.

It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Than it takes weeks of lamenting on the forums. So, it IS time consuming.

Got me, I laughed. Bravo

Is the concept of a shooting phase too complicated? Why do you get to shoot at assaulting models when there are already restrictions against reserves or disembarking models from assaulting? Have you tried gathering/rolling/keeping-track-off 100 dice for your 50-man guard blob shooting overwatch?

The game was fine before overwatch, it's not a key mechanic, it's a cop-out for poor planning and shooty armies.

 TheSilo wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

Also, how does it add up time? It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Done.

It takes maybe 5-15 seconds. Roll for 6's, pick up 1 or 2, roll for wounds, armor save. Than it takes weeks of lamenting on the forums. So, it IS time consuming.

Got me, I laughed. Bravo

Is the concept of a shooting phase too complicated? Why do you get to shoot at assaulting models when there are already restrictions against reserves or disembarking models from assaulting? Have you tried gathering/rolling/keeping-track-off 100 dice for your 50-man guard blob shooting overwatch?

The game was fine before overwatch, it's not a key mechanic, it's a cop-out for poor planning and shooty armies.

So you want to return to the era of awesome CC armies? Overwatch is a fine mechanic and adds flavor to the game. Trust me, removing would have a pretty big impact and I think a lot of armies would suffer for it.

Awesome CC armies existed because you could assault after deep strike, disembark after vehicles moved 12", assault after disembarking, and there were no shooting restrictions before assaulting. Overwatch is not why assault armies are weak.

In overwatch:
- A guardsman will only kill another guardsman with 6% of his shots
- A marine will only kill a guardsman with 11% of his shots
- A guardsman will kill a marine with 2% of his shots.
- A marine will kill a marine with 3% of his shots.

Even when you take one of the most elite troops in the game against one of the weakest, it's an utterly meaningless mechanic. Seriously, marine players gripe about marines being 14 point bolters, well in overwatch they're literally 75% worse. Outside of special weapons overwatch is just a waste of time.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:


The game was fine before overwatch, it's not a key mechanic, it's a cop-out for poor planning and shooty armies.

So you want to return to the era of awesome CC armies? Overwatch is a fine mechanic and adds flavor to the game. Trust me, removing would have a pretty big impact and I think a lot of armies would suffer for it.

I have to say, I much prefer a game favoring shooting over assault than the opposite.

It seems that 40K was less tactical in the CC editions.

Of course, having both balanced would be interesting as well.

morgoth wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:


The game was fine before overwatch, it's not a key mechanic, it's a cop-out for poor planning and shooty armies.

So you want to return to the era of awesome CC armies? Overwatch is a fine mechanic and adds flavor to the game. Trust me, removing would have a pretty big impact and I think a lot of armies would suffer for it.

I have to say, I much prefer a game favoring shooting over assault than the opposite.

It seems that 40K was less tactical in the CC editions.

Of course, having both balanced would be interesting as well.

40k isn't any more tactical now. It's not a tactical game, once you get past list building. Choices on the table do not effect the game enough.

Warmahordes, Infinity, they're tactical games. 40k is most certainly not.

And as said, overwatch isn't what's making combat armies crap. Not being able to assault from transports, after deep strike etc, having a lack of grenades for assault units, etc, that's why combat armies suck now.

Assault has never been possible from Deep Strike, at least not outside of a couple rare instances (e.g. 3E Daemonbomb)

That said, being unable to assault out of a stationary transport is definitely something that needs to get changed.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Yes and it can make the difference in a charge going off, or them making the charge but not winning the combat, and having a big impact on the game

And, the vast majority of the time, it just has no effect whatsoever and you might as well have spent the time making yourself a sandwich.

How about a mechanic that rewards tactics - not getting lucky.

 TheSilo wrote:

My fix for overwatch:

- Rapid fire, salvo, and heavy weapons cannot overwatch.

- Pistols and Assault weapons fire overwatch at -1 BS.

No more buckets of rapid fire shots wasting everyone's time. 40k's absurdly overpriced pistols now have a function in defending against assaults (seriously why do plasma pistols and plasma guns both cost 15 points?). And I like the picture of a commissar shooting down charging enemies with his bolt pistol. And the game's short-range assault weapons now get more action than the melta gun's 1-shot and then you're dead next turn. It's presumed that assault weapons are more easily brought to bear (hence why they can move and shoot and assault) so it only makes sense that they're easier to use in a defensive capacity.

I could get behind this.

 jreilly89 wrote:

So you want to return to the era of awesome CC armies? Overwatch is a fine mechanic and adds flavor to the game. Trust me, removing would have a pretty big impact and I think a lot of armies would suffer for it.

I play shooty armies and I still want overwatch gone.

Trust me - Overwatch is not the only thing keeping assault armies from dominating the game.

On the thing about Overwatch, I'd rather not change Overwatch, or remove it at all for that matter, but rather give Troops options, a la the different stands the Infantry can do in Fantasy. Now I'm not an expert on this, but as far as I know, you can Stand and Shoot (Basically overwatch I believe), Flee (RUN, RUN FOR THE LOVE OF SIGMAR) and some others I don't remember...

So, we could have the following options when charged:

Overwatch: The unit shoots at the charging enemy like usual, only with -2 BS. The unit hits at I 1 in the following Fight Sub-phase.

Brace for Impact!: The unit prepares for melee combat and ready their weapons. The unit can make one attack per model at I10 (Alternatively just use ASF from Fantasy)

Fall Back!: The unit flees the charging foe in a great hurry. The unit must take an Ld test - If succesful, the unit flees 3d6'' towards the Table Edge like had it lost a battle, and must make a Ld test to recover next turn. If failed, the unit also suffers a Sweeping Advance test. Either way, the charging squad(s) may Consolidate. Fearless and Stubborn models cannot do this maneuver.

Last Stand: The unit gathers its faith and courage, and charges the foe in a last defying act. The unit must take a Ld check - If failed, the unit falls back like had it lost a combat, suffering a Sweeping Advance test. If succesful, the unit gains the Counter-Charge, Fearless and Furious Charge USRs for the following fight sub-phase, but automatically loses 1d6 models per 10 models originally in the unit after the Fight Sub-phase. (Alternatively simply removes the entire squad instead of 1d6 per 10 models)

Anyone have other ideas for more bloat? I mean, the game is already so bloated, anything more won't be noticed

I like 40k and most of the mechanics are fine for me in the games we play...........

There are the problem areas - balance with units like the Wave Serpent and Riptide and now in 7th powers like Invisibility but on the whole we enjoy it.

There are many tweeks I'd like to see included and which we play around with as House Rules:

Assaulting from stationary vehicles
Vehicles allowed to overwatch with flamers etc
Drop the 7th ed Psychic Phase
Combine the Move and Run movements

I don't really have any issue with core mechanics.

 ImAGeek wrote:

morgoth wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:


The game was fine before overwatch, it's not a key mechanic, it's a cop-out for poor planning and shooty armies.

So you want to return to the era of awesome CC armies? Overwatch is a fine mechanic and adds flavor to the game. Trust me, removing would have a pretty big impact and I think a lot of armies would suffer for it.

I have to say, I much prefer a game favoring shooting over assault than the opposite.

It seems that 40K was less tactical in the CC editions.

Of course, having both balanced would be interesting as well.

40k isn't any more tactical now. It's not a tactical game, once you get past list building. Choices on the table do not effect the game enough.

Warmahordes, Infinity, they're tactical games. 40k is most certainly not.

And as said, overwatch isn't what's making combat armies crap. Not being able to assault from transports, after deep strike etc, having a lack of grenades for assault units, etc, that's why combat armies suck now.

I would suggest you dig deeper into 40K.

Choices on the table dictate the game.

morgoth wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

morgoth wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 TheSilo wrote:


The game was fine before overwatch, it's not a key mechanic, it's a cop-out for poor planning and shooty armies.

So you want to return to the era of awesome CC armies? Overwatch is a fine mechanic and adds flavor to the game. Trust me, removing would have a pretty big impact and I think a lot of armies would suffer for it.

I have to say, I much prefer a game favoring shooting over assault than the opposite.

It seems that 40K was less tactical in the CC editions.

Of course, having both balanced would be interesting as well.

40k isn't any more tactical now. It's not a tactical game, once you get past list building. Choices on the table do not effect the game enough.

Warmahordes, Infinity, they're tactical games. 40k is most certainly not.

And as said, overwatch isn't what's making combat armies crap. Not being able to assault from transports, after deep strike etc, having a lack of grenades for assault units, etc, that's why combat armies suck now.

I would suggest you dig deeper into 40K.

Choices on the table dictate the game.

To me at least, the game was never tactical. It's been a Narrativist game, focusing on telling stories and creating narratives between factions. Warmahordes is a Gaming game, focusing on a wholly balanced game, but sacrificing Narrative (The Iron Kingdoms universe usually have battles that make the Battle for Verdun blush, with maybe one to five 'Jacks per warzone). When you make your table, I do it balanced and with friends, so we get what would fit withour armies the most. We have a narrative in a ruined city, so a lot of ruins and rubble is due. Stuff like that won't be in Warmahordes - Or at least not in the competetive scene-

I don't mind the game not focusing on being a competetive tournament game, because I use it for fun and for narrative purposes - I like how 7th takes away some of the stuff that made some units overly complicated ad unique, while still keeping the factions fairly unique themselves in function. It's a bit of Gaming in a mostly Narrativistic game, and I likes it a lots

 The Wise Dane wrote:
On the thing about Overwatch, I'd rather not change Overwatch, or remove it at all for that matter, but rather give Troops options, a la the different stands the Infantry can do in Fantasy. Now I'm not an expert on this, but as far as I know, you can Stand and Shoot (Basically overwatch I believe), Flee (RUN, RUN FOR THE LOVE OF SIGMAR) and some others I don't remember...

So, we could have the following options when charged:

Overwatch: The unit shoots at the charging enemy like usual, only with -2 BS. The unit hits at I 1 in the following Fight Sub-phase.

Brace for Impact!: The unit prepares for melee combat and ready their weapons. The unit can make one attack per model at I10 (Alternatively just use ASF from Fantasy)

Fall Back!: The unit flees the charging foe in a great hurry. The unit must take an Ld test - If succesful, the unit flees 3d6'' towards the Table Edge like had it lost a battle, and must make a Ld test to recover next turn. If failed, the unit also suffers a Sweeping Advance test. Either way, the charging squad(s) may Consolidate. Fearless and Stubborn models cannot do this maneuver.

Last Stand: The unit gathers its faith and courage, and charges the foe in a last defying act. The unit must take a Ld check - If failed, the unit falls back like had it lost a combat, suffering a Sweeping Advance test. If succesful, the unit gains the Counter-Charge, Fearless and Furious Charge USRs for the following fight sub-phase, but automatically loses 1d6 models per 10 models originally in the unit after the Fight Sub-phase. (Alternatively simply removes the entire squad instead of 1d6 per 10 models)

I like the idea, however, I'd change Overwatch to a different penalty. If Overwatch is meant to be an exchange, then it should be an exchange for *all* units - not just high-initiative ones.

I mean, why should my DE sacrifice their main advantage in order to Overwatch, whilst my IG can Overwatch without noticing any difference in combat about 99% of the time?

Also, with regard to Last Stand, how would it work with Fearless units? In any case, with regard to the wounds at the end, maybe each surviving model could suffer a S7 AP1 hit? Or something along those lines?

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Anyone have other ideas for more bloat? I mean, the game is already so bloated, anything more won't be noticed

Yes, actually.

- Models can fire weapons in combat, instead of attacking normally. Heavy weapons, flamers and blasts cannot fire this way. I was considering compare a model's BS to the enemy WS, but just using the model's BS with a -1 penalty might be easier. I wasn't sure about rate of fire - whether models should be able to fire just a single shot

(Bear in mind, in my rules Overwatch doesn't exist - so this could be considered an exchange in that regard)

- Pistols can fire in combat, but are in addition to a model's other attacks and do not suffer the -1 BS penalty (if it's being used). Obviously though, they do not grant the model additional attacks with his other melee weapon.

- Models can fire into combats, but with a chance of hitting their own men. They must first take a Ld test (if failed, they cannot stomach shooting their own men - and must shoot elsewhere this turn). Ideally, models would receive penalties or bonuses, depending on whether their own men are outnumbered and on base sizes (e.g. it should be a lot easier to avoid hitting guardsmen fighting a wraithknight, compared with guardsmen fighting marines). However, I haven't worked out a proper system for this yet.

- Models in combat can attempt to disengage in the movement phase with a Morale test. If passed, they suffer free attacks but escape and can act normally, if failed they flee and the enemy can attempt to sweep them.

- In line with the above, I'd make it easier for units to get into assault - allowing assault from outflanking and from stationary vehicles, and perhaps make assault moves d6+4 or somesuch.

 vipoid wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:
On the thing about Overwatch, I'd rather not change Overwatch, or remove it at all for that matter, but rather give Troops options, a la the different stands the Infantry can do in Fantasy. Now I'm not an expert on this, but as far as I know, you can Stand and Shoot (Basically overwatch I believe), Flee (RUN, RUN FOR THE LOVE OF SIGMAR) and some others I don't remember...

So, we could have the following options when charged:

Overwatch: The unit shoots at the charging enemy like usual, only with -2 BS. The unit hits at I 1 in the following Fight Sub-phase.

Brace for Impact!: The unit prepares for melee combat and ready their weapons. The unit can make one attack per model at I10 (Alternatively just use ASF from Fantasy)

Fall Back!: The unit flees the charging foe in a great hurry. The unit must take an Ld test - If succesful, the unit flees 3d6'' towards the Table Edge like had it lost a battle, and must make a Ld test to recover next turn. If failed, the unit also suffers a Sweeping Advance test. Either way, the charging squad(s) may Consolidate. Fearless and Stubborn models cannot do this maneuver.

Last Stand: The unit gathers its faith and courage, and charges the foe in a last defying act. The unit must take a Ld check - If failed, the unit falls back like had it lost a combat, suffering a Sweeping Advance test. If succesful, the unit gains the Counter-Charge, Fearless and Furious Charge USRs for the following fight sub-phase, but automatically loses 1d6 models per 10 models originally in the unit after the Fight Sub-phase. (Alternatively simply removes the entire squad instead of 1d6 per 10 models)

I like the idea, however, I'd change Overwatch to a different penalty. If Overwatch is meant to be an exchange, then it should be an exchange for *all* units - not just high-initiative ones.

I mean, why should my DE sacrifice their main advantage in order to Overwatch, whilst my IG can Overwatch without noticing any difference in combat about 99% of the time?

Also, with regard to Last Stand, how would it work with Fearless units? In any case, with regard to the wounds at the end, maybe each surviving model could suffer a S7 AP1 hit? Or something along those lines?

 The Wise Dane wrote:
Anyone have other ideas for more bloat? I mean, the game is already so bloated, anything more won't be noticed

Yes, actually.

- Models can fire weapons in combat, instead of attacking normally. Heavy weapons, flamers and blasts cannot fire this way. I was considering compare a model's BS to the enemy WS, but just using the model's BS with a -1 penalty might be easier. I wasn't sure about rate of fire - whether models should be able to fire just a single shot

(Bear in mind, in my rules Overwatch doesn't exist - so this could be considered an exchange in that regard)

- Pistols can fire in combat, but are in addition to a model's other attacks and do not suffer the -1 BS penalty (if it's being used). Obviously though, they do not grant the model additional attacks with his other melee weapon.

- Models can fire into combats, but with a chance of hitting their own men. They must first take a Ld test (if failed, they cannot stomach shooting their own men - and must shoot elsewhere this turn). Ideally, models would receive penalties or bonuses, depending on whether their own men are outnumbered and on base sizes (e.g. it should be a lot easier to avoid hitting guardsmen fighting a wraithknight, compared with guardsmen fighting marines). However, I haven't worked out a proper system for this yet.

- Models in combat can attempt to disengage in the movement phase with a Morale test. If passed, they suffer free attacks but escape and can act normally, if failed they flee and the enemy can attempt to sweep them.

- In line with the above, I'd make it easier for units to get into assault - allowing assault from outflanking and from stationary vehicles, and perhaps make assault moves d6+4 or somesuch.

Imma just go through these as they come, okay?

Shooting in combat isn't really a thing we should do. I mean, one thing is adding things to make the game seem more like 40K, but adding things that aren't even a coherent part of the universe isn't really great... Also, if people could do as you state, they'll just use Sternguards in melee because of the relative strength of the weapons invovled. Don't like it... Though I would be fine with Pistols shooting in close combat.

I've never understood why people want to shoot into combats. It doesn't add something to the game, but takes away from it by removing one of the only way a melee unit can be safe. I mean, it makes sense, but unless you make it a part of that particular faction (Like Skaven having Skavenslaves), I wouldn't.

Disengaging from combat is fair, but also screws over melee lists, which I don't really want to do. The thing about melee combat being messy and hard to control is nice, so your guys can't just flee before they are scared out of their minds
An Order would be fine I guess.

On assualt I agree with you completely. I'd rather just have a 6'' Run move and 8'' Charge move, and then add 2'' to each for Fleet or Crusader. It's simpler that way. Charging from stationary vehicles and from Outflank would be nice, and, within reason, charging from Deep Strike... But we were talking about adding, not changing

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Imma just go through these as they come, okay?

Shooting in combat isn't really a thing we should do. I mean, one thing is adding things to make the game seem more like 40K, but adding things that aren't even a coherent part of the universe isn't really great... Also, if people could do as you state, they'll just use Sternguards in melee because of the relative strength of the weapons invovled. Don't like it... Though I would be fine with Pistols shooting in close combat.

I see your point gameplaywise, but I don't see why it isn't a coherent part of the universe - you see it all the time in the art and fluff.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

I've never understood why people want to shoot into combats. It doesn't add something to the game, but takes away from it by removing one of the only way a melee unit can be safe. I mean, it makes sense, but unless you make it a part of that particular faction (Like Skaven having Skavenslaves), I wouldn't.

I'm the other way round - I don't see why combats should ignore all logic and sense. Why, when guardsmen are engaged with a wraithknight, can others no longer shoot it?

 The Wise Dane wrote:

Disengaging from combat is fair, but also screws over melee lists, which I don't really want to do. The thing about melee combat being messy and hard to control is nice, so your guys can't just flee before they are scared out of their minds
An Order would be fine I guess.

Well, probably not for all the races who can't issue orders.

 The Wise Dane wrote:

On assualt I agree with you completely. I'd rather just have a 6'' Run move and 8'' Charge move, and then add 2'' to each for Fleet or Crusader. It's simpler that way. Charging from stationary vehicles and from Outflank would be nice, and, within reason, charging from Deep Strike... But we were talking about adding, not changing

But that's the thing - I'm aware that my suggestions hurt melee, so I wanted to add that I wanted to buff melee in other ways.

Basically, I'd just like to see melee become less of a rules-black-hole. Where all logic and normal gameplay have to be suspended.

 vipoid wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Yes and it can make the difference in a charge going off, or them making the charge but not winning the combat, and having a big impact on the game

And, the vast majority of the time, it just has no effect whatsoever and you might as well have spent the time making yourself a sandwich.

How about a mechanic that rewards tactics - not getting lucky.

They're essentially free shots. It's not supposed to be a reward, it's a built in game mechanic. Also, if you can do make a sandwich in that time, wanna mail me one while I'm doing my Overwatch?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheSilo wrote:
Awesome CC armies existed because you could assault after deep strike, disembark after vehicles moved 12", assault after disembarking, and there were no shooting restrictions before assaulting. Overwatch is not why assault armies are weak.

In overwatch:
- A guardsman will only kill another guardsman with 6% of his shots
- A marine will only kill a guardsman with 11% of his shots
- A guardsman will kill a marine with 2% of his shots.
- A marine will kill a marine with 3% of his shots.

Even when you take one of the most elite troops in the game against one of the weakest, it's an utterly meaningless mechanic. Seriously, marine players gripe about marines being 14 point bolters, well in overwatch they're literally 75% worse. Outside of special weapons overwatch is just a waste of time.

Rarely could you ever assault after deep strike. And Overwatch would help CC armies. If I can, I have a Tau player I'd love to play a no-Overwatch game against.

I still do not get the "waste of time". It takes maybe 15 seconds.

Overwatch isn't meant to kill a ton of things, it's meant to be reaction shots.

Also, Tau using improved BS on Overwatch but it does nothing? Sure. Tau take advantage of Overwatch pretty often. And how do special weapons matter in Overwatch? Other than the Flamer, they're the same as bolters, hitting on 6s.