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.

Hey folks, ive been chewing over a custom rule for 40k for a while now and was curious what you guys thought. The point of this is to change 40k from "you go, i go" to a more staggered turn structure ala Malifaux ect.

Start by ranking every unit in your codex "Fast - Medium - Slow" only with cooler words obviously , in principle it would break down something like this...

Fast = Jump troops, Bikes, Skimmers
Medium = Regular infantry, Some lighter tanks, Walkers.
Slow = Heavy Tanks, Artillery

Once you have done this and both sides have made there army list for say, a 2000pt battle all you do is make a little list of your army sorted Fast, Medium, Slow. In the movement Phase you take it in turns with your opponent (one unit each) to move your fast units, then medium units and finally the heavy units.

In the shooting phase you do the same but in reverse order, so the heavy stuff fires first then medium then fast. I have yet to actually try this but it seems like could be a quick and easy way to get a staggered turn system into 40k (assuming ofc your like me and feel that's a good thing).

There would of course be a lot of gray areas in each codex that would take a bit of thought as to if medium/fast ect and some other little complications i have not considered but nothing i feel that couldn't be worked out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In addition any unit classified as Heavy or as Medium but includes a heavy weapon is allowed to react to movement in the Fast/Medium movement phases. If they do they sacrifice all actions for the rest of the turn and you can only nominate 1 unit per enemy move to make a reaction shot.

That is not a simple solution to simplify the game but it id very interesting and realistic.

Sounds like an interesting idea.

slow = heavy
medium = troops
fast = elites
your choice = fast attack - representing the quick response nature of fast attack choices
hq default to whatever type unit they join or go to "your choice" representing their tactical supremacy.

Every codex is already sorted this way so it would be easier to implement.

just a thought

While cool, i think i would rather just make it go by initiative order.

That way having a IC with high initiative like a captain can be useful.

AT the same time i think there needs to be a stipulation that you can chose to default and hold till you want to go.

So you can drop an Initiative 5 then act at initiative 4 or 3 or whenever.

 Filch wrote:
That is not a simple solution to simplify the game but it id very interesting and realistic.

Filch yeh ofc any extra rule is adding complexity, what i mean by it being simple is that it could add this functionality with a minimum of extra paperwork/rules.

 rhinosaur wrote:
Sounds like an interesting idea.

slow = heavy
medium = troops
fast = elites
your choice = fast attack - representing the quick response nature of fast attack choices
hq default to whatever type unit they join or go to "your choice" representing their tactical supremacy.

Every codex is already sorted this way so it would be easier to implement.

just a thought

Dont think that would work tbh, Sternguard are just as mobile as any other infantry for example many many weird counter intuitive things like that would crop up. If a unit has a jet pack it should be fast regardless of weather its elite ect, that seems the only sensible
way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:
While cool, i think i would rather just make it go by initiative order.

That way having a IC with high initiative like a captain can be useful.

AT the same time i think there needs to be a stipulation that you can chose to default and hold till you want to go.

So you can drop an Initiative 5 then act at initiative 4 or 3 or whenever.

That was my initial thought but the initiative stat is not really meant for initiative in this way and would lead to a very counter intuitive ordering.

 Gantoris wrote:
Dont think that would work tbh, Sternguard are just as mobile as any other infantry for example many many weird counter intuitive things like that would crop up. If a unit has a jet pack it should be fast regardless of weather its elite ect, that seems the only sensible
way.

It would prevent people from gaming the system by taking all bikes or jump packs.

Making sense isn't always balanced and "fun for everyone" is more important.

but I can see your logic.

If you took all bikes you would be obliterated in the shooting phase as all the enemy's units get to fire before you.

If you want to increase the interaction, simple interleaved phases work quite well.

Player A move.
Player B move
Player A shoot
Player B Shoots
Player A assault.
Player B assaults.
(Roll for initiative each turn.)

However, to 'break up the action' , we could use the game turn from Epic Space Marine.

Command phase.

First fire phase.

Charge Phase.

Advance Phase

End of turn phase.

In the command phase, Players pick what order they want to give to their unit (Face down.)

Unit on first fire orders remain stationary, but shoot before ANY movement takes place.

Units on charge orders can not shoot but may move twice, and can charge in to assault at any point in this double movement .

Units on advance orders may move up to normal movement , then fire 'move and fire' weapons.

The 'End of turn phase 'is the tidy up phase , to get everything sorted befor e the next turn starts.

Players alternate activating units on the appropriate orders , until they run out of units on the appropriate order.

This adds far more tactical complexity to the game turn,( so may not be suitable for current 40k?)

Upon reflection i see an issue here, the ordering might be a problem. It seems to me moving first is actually a disadvantage because the enemy would be able to move the heavy stuff in response to the fast units position.

Ultimately the positive end result of being more mobile is getting a better position, to achieve that would take being a bit counter intuitive. Reverse order for movement, heavy weapons would have to choose to stay still if they want to reaction fire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lanark, i love the Epic system and think those rules are solid but i don't think they would translate smoothly into 40k and would dramatically increase the amount of work each turn would take.

 Gantoris wrote:
Upon reflection i see an issue here, the ordering might be a problem. It seems to me moving first is actually a disadvantage because the enemy would be able to move the heavy stuff in response to the fast units position.

Ultimately the positive end result of being more mobile is getting a better position, to achieve that would take being a bit counter intuitive. Reverse order for movement, heavy weapons would have to choose to stay still if they want to reaction fire.

Make it a roll off then and winner choose who makes first move.

There will be good advantages and disadvantages for playing large numbers of models over small. perhaps give the person that finishes first a +1 to the roll off. so they can make the tactical choices.

Its not really about which player moves a unit first its about all the fast units moving before everyone else in the turn order. This is not the advantage it might seem at first because the apparently less mobile heavy units would have a huge positioning advantage by being able to move after seeing where the fast units have gone.

 Gantoris wrote:
Its not really about which player moves a unit first its about all the fast units moving before everyone else in the turn order. This is not the advantage it might seem at first because the apparently less mobile heavy units would have a huge positioning advantage by being able to move after seeing where the fast units have gone.

Thats why i suggested defaulting and being able to act later.

If you move in reverse order the problem is solved, the heavy's get a huge advantage in being able to fire first but the fast stuff gets a huge advantage in how its positioned.

And just because i love scouts would be nice to say if you have either the Stealth or Scout special rules you cannot be shot at with reaction fire and if you have both you can reaction fire and move in your turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Remember not to think of it in terms of just being a fast unit verses a heavy unit aswell, often people will want their own heavy units to be facing enemy hard targets. This is a fact fast and medium units could and should be able to exploit.

@Gantoris.
I am aware that the Epic SM turn structure adds a bit more complication and lots more tactical complexity.

However, the order units act and how they act is decided by player skill.Rather than the stat line of the unit.

A units stat line should not dictate the turn order they activate in , just how they fight.IMO.
(Initiative is just how good at dodging in close combat the unit is.The more agile units will land the first blow, not necessarily swing first.So Initiative is not good to define activation order out of close combat IMO.)

The options in the Epic game turn are.

1)First Fire.
Stay still and shoot before movement.

2)Charge,
Move twice and not shoot.( Must be used to launch an assault.)

3)Advance.
Move then shoot.

I do not think 3 clearly defined orders , that are activated in 3 specific turns are that complicated.

Deciding what units are going to do at the start of the turn , may cause some players tactical headaches.
But putting ONE counter next to each unit at the start of the turn is not 'heavy book keeping' is it ?

Compared to having to rate units activation sequence on several variable stats, this seems much simpler IMO.