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.

Makumba wrote:
Only GW isn't know for their restrictions when they deal with eldar or sm, and those factions deep strike the most.

So what if GW doesn't? We aren't talking about GW, since we're already in the realm of changing rules, that's a completely invalid line or reasoning.

Makumba wrote:
Also even if it had restriction and was a buff to some units, why should people accept it, when their armies will never use it anyway, as GW did not give them any good deep striking units that could do melee.

Same reason a Space Marine or Eldar player should accept a buff to underpowered units from other factions.

Makumba wrote:
Only GW isn't know for their restrictions when they deal with eldar or sm, and those factions deep strike the most. Also even if it had restriction and was a buff to some units, why should people accept it, when their armies will never use it anyway, as GW did not give them any good deep striking units that could do melee.
SM and eldar are good enough with out those things, they don't need another buff and another different way to play their army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Go try to play an assault list and after getting zero vp for three or four games, then we can talk. I'm sorry you are having trouble but BA are embarrassingly bad at assault.

But were they ever ment for that? I don't know about the 3ed and times before it. I started in 5th, BAs were always tank walls and msu razorspams that did used melee only as support or int he form of a super killer HQ like mefistor.

SM and Eldar are not the only armies that want to deep strike. You are just aware of them because they do function while other assault armies do not. I do want to deepstrike my Trygons, that's what they are made for anyways. Only when I do I am left to look at my 200 pt monster being shot to pieces by practically any unit in the game and be unable to do anything about it. Way to go, Trygon. Assault is way OP, sure.

Also I don't get the "why should people accept it, when their armies will never use it anyway" argument. People should accept it because other armies also want to play the game. Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies have 48" shots and ap2/3 shooting while they don't? Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies can have 2+ armor saves while they cannot? Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies have invulnerable saves while they do not? Yet these things happen and it is very very easy to miss this if you are playing any other army, because you are on the receiving end of the buff. And then you want Tyranids not be able to have good stuff because if they do then Tau won't be able to use them? What kind of logic is that?

" I started in 5th, BAs were always tank walls and msu razorspams that did used melee only as support or int he form of a super killer HQ like Mephiston."

That is not what BA are supposed to be. BA players (like me) were just working the systems laid out in 5th. BA are designed to be a fast meq assault army. They haven't been able to do that for some time now.

The main problem is the fact assaulting after they enter is pretty much a deth blow to many different armies. Tau and Guard for example would be pretty much hammered and forced out of competitive lists.

As someone else said earlier, make deep-striking risky again. land on difficult terrain? Have to risk loosing your squad, obviously never heard termie fluff regarding landing on diff terrain and even real life para's have been annihilated doing so. However I am all for giving unit's buffs for surviving a deepstrike once they landed. Such as a +1 cover save for jet troopers or nids to represent the amount of dust, dirt kicked up or the fact they have just jumped out of a hole in the ground etc.

Nothing too OP, just something to help deepstriking units survive a lil bit more in their opponents phase, but making deepstriking inherently risky again, especially near cover or enemy units. I don't actually think you need to make them capable of assaulting the turn they arrive to make them better.

Also I don't get the "why should people accept it, when their armies will never use it anyway" argument. People should accept it because other armies also want to play the game. Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies have 48" shots and ap2/3 shooting while they don't? Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies can have 2+ armor saves while they cannot? Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies have invulnerable saves while they do not? Yet these things happen and it is very very easy to miss this if you are playing any other army, because you are on the receiving end of the buff. And then you want Tyranids not be able to have good stuff because if they do then Tau won't be able to use them? What kind of logic is that

But they already can play the game. We realy want to give swooping hawks the option to drop from the sky, haywire something on the go, then scater and then charge another unit. Or 2-3 trygons poping out and multicharging a whole army. What am I suppose to do against that, giving deep strike a charge option, even for limited units would just mean that more faction are like skyhammer and that is probably the stupidest formation ever created. also what are you talking about not having 48" treat range on tyranids, all dakka tyrants have it. Plus your missing the point the lack of invs does not make nids unplayable, charging out of deep strike would make my faction unplayable even more and it already sucks.
Just tell me lets say you get a limited deep strike charge option. Trygon tunel lets units charge out of it or something like that. How do you imagine an IG army is suppose to counter that? Even If I somehow down 2-3 trygons and don't get blow to bits by dakka tyrants, next turn your chargin out of the tunels and I can't be out of range of them because you have a too long charge range and most important your tunels probably poped up on objectives, so If I move away am giving you free points.

Same reason a Space Marine or Eldar player should accept a buff to underpowered units from other factions.

And as we say it here "and the groundhog just sits there and rolls them up in silver foil". People don't even let others use special character their armies had, but no longer do thanks to GW.

BA are designed to be a fast meq assault army.

Where does it say that in the rules. Because in the codex I read, they are supposed to be the same as ultramarine with a few different tanks and DC.

YES, dear god yes things should be able to assault from deep strike, any other kind of reserve scout or infiltrate. Bring back the glory days of out-flankers and other nasty quick combat trick.
It forces gun lines and other shooty armies to use screeners and other tactics aside from move back and shoot again.

Makumba wrote:

Also I don't get the "why should people accept it, when their armies will never use it anyway" argument. People should accept it because other armies also want to play the game. Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies have 48" shots and ap2/3 shooting while they don't? Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies can have 2+ armor saves while they cannot? Why should Tyranid players accept that other armies have invulnerable saves while they do not? Yet these things happen and it is very very easy to miss this if you are playing any other army, because you are on the receiving end of the buff. And then you want Tyranids not be able to have good stuff because if they do then Tau won't be able to use them? What kind of logic is that

But they already can play the game. We realy want to give swooping hawks the option to drop from the sky, haywire something on the go, then scater and then charge another unit. Or 2-3 trygons poping out and multicharging a whole army. What am I suppose to do against that, giving deep strike a charge option, even for limited units would just mean that more faction are like skyhammer and that is probably the stupidest formation ever created. also what are you talking about not having 48" treat range on tyranids, all dakka tyrants have it. Plus your missing the point the lack of invs does not make nids unplayable, charging out of deep strike would make my faction unplayable even more and it already sucks.
Just tell me lets say you get a limited deep strike charge option. Trygon tunel lets units charge out of it or something like that. How do you imagine an IG army is suppose to counter that? Even If I somehow down 2-3 trygons and don't get blow to bits by dakka tyrants, next turn your chargin out of the tunels and I can't be out of range of them because you have a too long charge range and most important your tunels probably poped up on objectives, so If I move away am giving you free points.

Same reason a Space Marine or Eldar player should accept a buff to underpowered units from other factions.

And as we say it here "and the groundhog just sits there and rolls them up in silver foil". People don't even let others use special character their armies had, but no longer do thanks to GW.

BA are designed to be a fast meq assault army.

Where does it say that in the rules. Because in the codex I read, they are supposed to be the same as ultramarine with a few different tanks and DC.

You can't multiassault with a single model, that proves you know NOTHING about the current state of the game and armies
Oh and FYI Trygon's Tunnel SUCKS

I think some units should definitely have it, and I think a lot of people overestimate the impact it would have. Vanguard Veterans used to have it, how many games were decided by Vanguard Veterans assaulting from deep strike? Blood Angels currently have a formation that allows it, Blood Angels are still a bottom tier army. The scale is so far in shooting's favor right now, having some specialist units be able to assault from deep strike would not even come close to breaking the game.

" Because in the codex I read, they are supposed to be the same as ultramarine with a few different tanks and DC."

Then why don't they get any of the UM's good units? Sure, you can look at them as UM minus all the good stuff. Because that's basically what they are at this point.

The 2nd ed, 3rd ed and 5th ed codices certainly gave me the impression they were supposed to be more assaulty than UM.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

You can't multiassault with a single model, that proves you know NOTHING about the current state of the game and armies
Oh and FYI Trygon's Tunnel SUCKS

No it doesn't. It totally makes it worth the 230 points base.

 Orblivion wrote:
I think some units should definitely have it, and I think a lot of people overestimate the impact it would have. Vanguard Veterans used to have it, how many games were decided by Vanguard Veterans assaulting from deep strike? Blood Angels currently have a formation that allows it, Blood Angels are still a bottom tier army. The scale is so far in shooting's favor right now, having some specialist units be able to assault from deep strike would not even come close to breaking the game.

What bothers me is that Loyalist Assault Marines CAN assault from deepstrike from Skyhammer, and Vanguard Veterans don't have any way of doing so.

Mostly for fluff reasons though.

I could see assault from deepstrike for everyone else MAYBE be ok if the unit being charged at got a full bs overwatch.

Makumba wrote:
But they already can play the game. We realy want to give swooping hawks the option to drop from the sky, haywire something on the go, then scater and then charge another unit. Or 2-3 trygons poping out and multicharging a whole army. What am I suppose to do against that, giving deep strike a charge option, even for limited units would just mean that more faction are like skyhammer and that is probably the stupidest formation ever created. also what are you talking about not having 48" treat range on tyranids, all dakka tyrants have it. Plus your missing the point the lack of invs does not make nids unplayable, charging out of deep strike would make my faction unplayable even more and it already sucks.
Just tell me lets say you get a limited deep strike charge option. Trygon tunel lets units charge out of it or something like that. How do you imagine an IG army is suppose to counter that? Even If I somehow down 2-3 trygons and don't get blow to bits by dakka tyrants, next turn your chargin out of the tunels and I can't be out of range of them because you have a too long charge range and most important your tunels probably poped up on objectives, so If I move away am giving you free points.

Fair enough, even though you miss the point that a Trygon costs more than a Tank commander and just sits there eating bullets while your tank commander with its 29 attacks can wreck my day from first turn with ease. But there are a lot of stuff one can do to make sure this will actually fly. On your imperial guard, you can always blitzkrieg and have said trygon only charge conscripts (it will only be able to kill 5 conscripts at most). But anyways, there can be a lot of mechanics changes that can help with that.

Example 1: Allow charging from deep striking but models that entered the game via deep strike this turn halve their charge range rolled.

Example 2: The deep striking unit pinpoints the point of the deepstrike on the first turn at an empty location, but only deepstrikes on the second turn on said point. If an enemy unit (A) moves onto the pinpointed location to cause a mishap and the deep strike unit rolls a hit, it does not mishap. Instead it emerges locked in combat with unit A. This will give gunline armies one turn advantage to clear the way or place conscripts and other chaff in place to protect their juicy stuff. If assault armies have to include cannon fodder units to make their army viable, I can see gunline armies having to include choppa fodder units to make their shooting viable.

Example 3: Deep striking units cannot assault, but nearby enemy units within 12" of the deep strike point become "shaken" and can only fire against the deep strike unit with a -2 BS. Or easier, deep strike units get shrouded on the turn they appear on the table.

topaxygouroun i wrote:
Example 3: Deep striking units cannot assault, but nearby enemy units within 12" of the deep strike point become "shaken" and can only fire against the deep strike unit with a -2 BS. Or easier, deep strike units get shrouded on the turn they appear on the table.

Well, Warp Talons force a Blind Test, so this mechanic wouldn't be entirely unprecedented.

Either way there's one core problem. Shooting DS is an alpha strike. Assault DS is a positioning method. We want to buff one while not affecting the other.

Maybe we can allow any DS unit that foregoes shooting to recieve some kind of bonus. Like, a "Precision Deep Strike" USR that reduces or eliminates Scatter.

- Sternguard Vets Deep Strike normally, scatter mildly into open, fire Combi-weapons. End turn. Business as usual.
- Vanguard Vets Precision Strike into open, use run to achieve better spacing and enter 4+ cover safely. End turn.
- Warp Talons Precision Strike onto Necron Destroyers to force a Blind test. Warp Talons can't shoot anyway!
- TH/SS Terminators Precision Strike into the best position possible. With a 2+/3++ and no guns, who needs cover or shooting?
- Seraphim (with Inferno Pistols) Precision Strike behind LOS-blocking terrain. Their 3" Melta range makes regular scatter too risky anyway.
- A DE Venom uses Precision Strike to enter the enemy backfield. Wyches disembark into cover. The Raider then moves onto a backfield objective. Nobody gets to shoot.

Obviously you'd still have issues in assault against lists that go "if I shoot, I win"'. That might be a different issue though.

Assaulting from deepstrike is a nono but I would not mind seeing some units - notably the squishier ones - gaining a slight cover save boost on the turn that they come in.

There's another issue, in that Assault units need a high degree of coordination to break through. Coming in piecemeal has far higher consequences, since they can get picked off one-by-one rather than tying up the defenders.

Survival mechanics are good but it's probably better established on a unit-by-unit basis.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
(seriously, even with overwatch my Veterans will rarely put more than a single wound on a Tactical Squad).

Amongst everything else, this statement comes across as totally absurd. Veterans have access to 3 special weapons per squad of 10. That's 3 flamers, 3 plasma guns, 3 melta guns... Flamers will let you put a load of wounds on enemies and force armor saves, plasma guns will kill everything they point at, and melta guns... eh, sub par against marines, I guess. That's going to smoke a unit of Grey Knights (as it has to me, many times. My opponent being a Veteran heavy Guard player).

Veterans have way more than enough tools to absolutely punish an enemy deep striking into their midst. I'm only calling this out because you mention it as something currently happening with you, and not something that will happen should assaulting from deep strike be a thing that is implemented. Obviously if you ONLY have overwatch, you're going to kill a lot fewer MEQs, but "even with" overwatch you should be scoring plenty of wounds.

Three special weapons firing overwatch. Three Meltas will rarely inflict a single wound owing to lacking the number of shots, three Plasma Guns will inflict 1 casualty on the assaulting player and will also kill off one Veteran. Flamers are the only way to go for counter assault choices. You will inflict on average 6 hits of which three will wound and, on your average MEQ, one will fail his save and die. Not much bang for your buck IMHO.

Just want to make sure I understand here. When you say "even with overwatch", do you mean shooting phase + overwatch or overwatch+close combat attacks? I'm guessing the latter at this point since you didn't mention the damage you would do in the shooting phase (nor did you mention the damage done in the subsequent cc attacks, but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt).

(Someone earlier was going on about how an IG Veteran Section can kill an entire squad in one turn of shooting - someone whom was obviously talking out of their ass and has never faced IG before - even Melta vets will struggle to kill three MEQ's)

3 Plasma guns will annihilate the common Grey Knight squads. Do you... do you take Veteran squads with only lasguns? You keep bringing up lasguns as if they're the only weapons you've got... That's gonna really skew your idea of relative durability of various units...

Not at all, once again people forget the psychic dickery that GK can get up too which include such lovelies as invulnerable save buffs. I will kill on average three basic GK's without Invun, Cover or FNP at 12" and also lose a Veteran. That is I will lose a 21 point model owing to overheating.
Lasguns are, for the most part, the only weapons that I have in my Veterans. Sure there are special weapons but those three special snowflakes cost a bomb each and they are only a small part of the overall section. The rest have Lasguns and trust me on this: Lasguns will not be killing GK's much.

I assure you, I do not forget the psychic "dickery" that GK can get up to. Killing on average, a minimum of 60pts of GKs at the cost of 21pts of your own models seems like a really good trade, considering that GK unit will likely kill, assuming 4 storm bolters and a psycannon, 4-5 Veterans (a whopping 28-35pts. So Grey Knights: 49-56. Imperial Guard: 60.)
Generally, only one unit is going to have FnP in the army, IF they take it, and it's falling out of favor these days with the advent of Centurions who do the same job but better. The majority of the psychic dickery focuses around close combat. Hammerhand isn't going to do anything to you the turn the Deep Strike. Banishment is never, ever going to do anything to you. Cover is unlikely in a Deep Strike scenario and is basically uncontrollable on the player's part. if you deployed close enough to the cover (without being in the cover), it's kind of your fault for giving them that avenue.
I will acknowledge that if a DraigoStar drops into your back field WITH the army's supporting units, you'll probably only be able to kill the supporting units and take a doozy of a beating from the Star. If it's just a couple of strike squads landing in your zone... they're toast.

Deepstriking and assaulting should have its risks. Stop whining and in all honesty deal with it.

Risk of not entering the board
Risk of mishap
Risk of scattering too far from your target

Risk of failing the charge
Risk of dying to overwatch
Risk of killing your target too fast/too slow (too fast and you're in the enemy deployment zone surrounded by their army, too slow and their countercharge units join the fray or their tarpits pile on)

Combing the two... only increases the risks!

I am going to be frank here: I have only twice in the last year seen a Deepstrike mishap and that was down to the player being an idiot. Not entering the board never happens and scattering is so easily mitigated that it might as well not exist.

I've suffered Deep Strike mishaps 3x in one game. It's rare that I go a game without suffering it. Not entering the board DOES happen, actually. If I get tabled on turn 3 cause 75% of my army decided to stay back in reserves, those units never come in. Scattering does exist, so let's talk about it. You can't just write it off as negligible, because it is a big factor in Deep Striking.

The riss of failing the charge is a fair one but if you are dropping in that close then it is vastly reduced.

It is still there, though. I failed a 3" charge the other day. It happens.

Dying to Overwatch? When was the last time Overwatch inflicted even a single wound before saves?

Oh boy, not only do I die from overwatch, my Eversor Assassin has NEVER reached combat, although he has declared charges. I've played him in 5 games, and the only one he didn't declare a charge in was the one where a scouting land speeder hit him with a multi-melta turn one.
Another story: A Kastelan robot declared a charge against a lone Paladin with a single wound left (the rest of his squad had just been wiped out by a different unit of Kastelans). I declare Overwatch, scoring 1 hit with my storm bolter. That hit is then saved by the Kastelan's shield... which bounces it back... which kills the Paladin.
Not only do I die to Overwatch... I die to my own Overwatch.

Killing them too fast still leaves you close to invulnerable to large blasts unless the enemy was spaced out and the risk is all together dropped by having several DS assault units. Countercharge is rarely if ever a risk.

Agree that it makes you less susceptible to large blasts. Disagree that countercharge is rarely if ever a risk.

Rihgu -- you can probably imagine the carnage if Cleansing Flame (9" range) hits 3x Vet units at once and you roll high.

It's the best Nova power in the game and it's the perfect counter to T3/4+ bubblewrap. 2D6 hits per unit, wounds on 2's, and Vets get no saves of course. Throw in Heavy Flamers to clean up and that's that.

You can lose games in deployment and I'm guessing that's what happened -- hoping your opponent gets unlucky on scatter isn't a strategy.

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
The main problem is the fact assaulting after they enter is pretty much a deth blow to many different armies. Tau and Guard for example would be pretty much hammered and forced out of competitive lists.

As someone else said earlier, make deep-striking risky again. land on difficult terrain? Have to risk loosing your squad, obviously never heard termie fluff regarding landing on diff terrain and even real life para's have been annihilated doing so. However I am all for giving unit's buffs for surviving a deepstrike once they landed. Such as a +1 cover save for jet troopers or nids to represent the amount of dust, dirt kicked up or the fact they have just jumped out of a hole in the ground etc.

Nothing too OP, just something to help deepstriking units survive a lil bit more in their opponents phase, but making deepstriking inherently risky again, especially near cover or enemy units. I don't actually think you need to make them capable of assaulting the turn they arrive to make them better.

Or better yet, you could give them these difficulties, along with boosts to the defending unit and then they could Deep Strike into Assault and all would be well. I made a big list of things but it could boil down to a few things easily enough:
1) They have to choose between Shooting and Assault, not both. Maybe there could be an option to do nothing and get the bonuses people suggested, but not sure.
2) If they choose Assault, they arrive on a 4+ or 5+ instead of a 3+ and maybe also scatter 3D6 with any mishap wiping the unit?
NB: Not sure what stuff that would normally help like Teleport Homers would do to this. Same effect? Less effect? No effect?
3) They can't do it from a transport (like a Drop Pod)
4) Upon landing the assailants only charge 1D6 (potentially as if they're going through Dfficult or Dangerous Terrain?) into only one unit and the defenders are treated as having the charge for purposes of +1 Attack, Furious Charge, Hammer of Wrath and so on, as well as getting the option to disengage at the end of this particular Assault like an auto-pass Hit & Run.
5) The defending unit gets to make an Interceptor attack (even without Interceptor, and without locking out the gun used to do it!) and/or get to Overwatch at full BS with Blasts allowed (maybe with no scatter?) and Templates the same, even if they're Slow and Purposeful or a Vehicle (the latter being treated as stationary for what weapons they can fire)
NB: I figure either one of those should be able to give Tau and IG a fighting chance, both of those at once would have them begging for a Deep Strike charge! I could see a few exceptions like squishy weak units (this would be an expensive and risky way to take them out, so that's nothing much to worry about. If they're putting those many points at that much risk to take out your Convicts or Pathfinders, you're probably not going to have that many problems with them all things considered! Though I suppose that's still something to consider, but with how much cost and risk I'd say that if it's good way that works out and makes a difference it's probably just a legitimate counter), choppy units (who would probably be happy the fight is coming to them and they get to count as having the charge!) and just plain bad units (No offense but I'm getting the idea that this might be the real root of some of the IG complaints. In any case the issue is more that it's just a bad unit that needs to be fixed, rather than much of anything to do with choppy Deep Strikes).
That's kind of a refinement of my earlier thoughts, mixed with some new ideas and some clarification, I think that would solve the main issues with the idea (too easy/reliable, defending unit can't fight back, shooting and charging from Deep Strike, locking up the defending unit with no escape and Assault Drop Pods). I'm certainly open to feedback and I'm actually trying to balance the idea. Some units absolutely need it (Assault Marines, Vanguard Veterans, Stormboyz, Warp Talons and all or nearly all Terminators just to name a few) but I'm not completely closed to the idea that just allowing it with no restrictions might cause some problems. I'm just getting sick of "NO THAT WOULD BE OP" with no discussion or acknowledgement of potential restrictions.

Terminators should be able to. I would bring them into the "usefull unit" category.

I say everyone DSs with full bs overwatch . Id love to see people make big DS armys. Giant piles of DSing units trying to drop into their opponents deployment zone. A zone so crowded that their constantly misshaping. It would be hilarious. One third of the DS'ers not showing up. Comedy.

Unless of course your army's supposed to be a DS heavy army. Then maybe you should be able to pull it off....

Yoyoyo wrote:
Rihgu -- you can probably imagine the carnage if Cleansing Flame (9" range) hits 3x Vet units at once and you roll high.

It's the best Nova power in the game and it's the perfect counter to T3/4+ bubblewrap. 2D6 hits per unit, wounds on 2's, and Vets get no saves of course. Throw in Heavy Flamers to clean up and that's that.

You can lose games in deployment and I'm guessing that's what happened -- hoping your opponent gets unlucky on scatter isn't a strategy.

Yes, I can imagine that, but that requires you to either ally to take drop pods for Purifiers or roll the power on a Librarian to actually do.
Also, fairly easy to Deny the Witch on that one, unless they're sacrificing their psychic phase elsewhere.

As far as strategies:
Bring Psyker defense
Bring Interceptor
Bring Coteaz
Keep your plasma toting vets more than 9" of eachother but the units closer so that the nova can only possibly wound 1 unit's plasmas, meaning there are still 2 units' worth of plasma left alive (assuming 1 deep striker with Cleansing Flame, kind of harder to pull off when there is more - I will give that)
Put your Veterans in Chimeras

There's a lot you can do to mitigate the issue there, and none of it involves praying...

You can't multiassault with a single model, that proves you know NOTHING about the current state of the game and armies
Oh and FYI Trygon's Tunnel SUCKS

Only if people got to option to charge with a trygon after deep strike or out of a trygon tunel, the lists would not be one trygon and something . The lists would be 3-4 trygons which means for an IG army the whole army getting charged on the turn they go out of tunels.

Bring Psyker defense
Bring Interceptor
Bring Coteaz

Aka to play IG you need to play other armies. Why play IG at all then, why not take the same units with interceptor and coteaz and something like marines.

Fair enough, even though you miss the point that a Trygon costs more than a Tank commander and just sits there eating bullets while your tank commander with its 29 attacks can wreck my day from first turn with ease. But there are a lot of stuff one can do to make sure this will actually fly. On your imperial guard, you can always blitzkrieg and have said trygon only charge conscripts (it will only be able to kill 5 conscripts at most). But anyways, there can be a lot of mechanics changes that can help with that.

Only there are already charge after assault rules in the game right now, and nothing points out at GW wanting to change their charge range or limit the charge in anyway.
Tank commanders suck. Bad orders you need to take another LR tank with them and they die to grav and give up slay the warlord on turn 1.

Yes, but limited to only a small handful of units. Warp Talons would be one as being able to assault on the same turn as their blind attack would be immensely good.

Maybe if terminators could we would see a lot more people using them. Perhaps just Chaos terminators. In fact, make everything in Chaos Space Marines able to assault from deep strike and it will even the playing field for them against most other armies

Back in 3rd Ed Deamons could assault the turn they where summoned, it was strong sure, but it was not the thing that made you win games.

Now i could see a new rule or unit type allowing assault after DSing, like Elite Assault unit or something.

You DS like usual, scatter, mishap and all, IF you decide to assault in the same turn, you DON'T shoot in the same turn.

As a general notion, no.

There are a few units however, whose design and fluff should make it possible for them. I'm thinking mostly about Warp Talons, their fluff clearly states they're precisely the kind of unit which appears from nowhere and strikes before the enemy can even react. Plus they're currently useless.

I think it's a similar situation to what happens with "no assault after disembark unless you have an assault vehicle". As a general rule it's ok, but there are some units out there that should be able to assault from any kind of vehicle: Khorne Berzerkers, veteran Chaos Marines with CC weapons, etc.

 Korinov wrote:
As a general notion, no.

There are a few units however, whose design and fluff should make it possible for them. I'm thinking mostly about Warp Talons, their fluff clearly states they're precisely the kind of unit which appears from nowhere and strikes before the enemy can even react. Plus they're currently useless.

I think it's a similar situation to what happens with "no assault after disembark unless you have an assault vehicle". As a general rule it's ok, but there are some units out there that should be able to assault from any kind of vehicle: Khorne Berzerkers, veteran Chaos Marines with CC weapons, etc.

I agree completely with it being a general no.

However it would need something to stop it being fairly OP. People keep stating termies, even with full BS over-watch most units aren't going to do much against them.

I'm quite happy with the suggestion, a 3d6 scatter and give the defending unit all the charging buffs plus a chance to disengage afterwards. Also give it to specific units as some kind of upgrade option, not a general all round rule every unit as a general DS rule.

Maybe call it 'forced charge' or something, also give it rules to help those units such as Khorne Berzerkers coming out of transports?

 master of ordinance wrote:

Right now assault is far too powerful as it is.

How to immediately lose all credibility in discussing 7th ed 40k... what?! and you play guard to boot.

I've played quiet a few games, even outside the box ones like facing down 30k World Eaters with an IG gun/tank line (with and without a primarch)... it wasn't even fair, and it wasn't the assault armies that died on the vine. Seriously, how are you losing to assault armies as an IG/AM player (one loss once isn't what I'm talking about, if you're making bold statements like "assault is too powerful" I'm assuming this is a repeated trend you've observed... if not, your ignorance grows as your credibility diminishes)? Are you sure your group is playing the rules correctly? Have you gone to tournaments? What gives?!

Wow, just wow... moving on

5th ed was not that very long ago. Having played since the RT days, doing several mid to low level tourneys, and owning just about every type of army (not every codex, just every type ie: horde, elite, assault, gunline, 30k legion, etc), I agree that reserves and assault need some help. I'd think that a few restrictions could allow more assaults out reserves into the game

1) if moving on to your table edge from reserve, assault as normal (seriously have no clue why this isn't in the game already)
2) if outflanking, limited assaults... maybe only disordered charges against single units (or maybe limit the charge distance to d6 or the like)
3) no deep strike assaults... that's just unbalancing, or only allow it like vanguard vets used to have it in older additions (and trust me, no one was winning competitive games with heroic intervention back in the day) and only on a very small number of units (say 1 per codex)

I mean seriously, we have formations now that allow full BS overwatch on entire lists... there's Tau/IG/Eldar, no way assaults are OP. And those top tourney lists that allegedly are using "assault units" to win. Those would be mobile units that are grabbing objectives and denying board control... they're not largely winning on the top tables by ROFLstomping in assaults.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW, the assertion that assault armies are winning tourneys... here's the top 20 armies and their secondaries from the BAO. I don't see an overwhelming presence of assault codices here.

Daemons
Chaos Space Marines x2
Eldar x2
Skitarii
Cult mechanicus
Blood Angels
Space Marines x4
Tau x4
Orks x2
Imperial Knights x2
Imperial Guard x2
Tyranids
Space Wolves
Necrons

 Lobukia wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

Right now assault is far too powerful as it is.

How to immediately lose all credibility in discussing 7th ed 40k... what?! and you play guard to boot.

I've played quiet a few games, even outside the box ones like facing down 30k World Eaters with an IG gun/tank line (with and without a primarch)... it wasn't even fair, and it wasn't the assault armies that died on the vine. Seriously, how are you losing to assault armies as an IG/AM player (one loss once isn't what I'm talking about, if you're making bold statements like "assault is too powerful" I'm assuming this is a repeated trend you've observed... if not, your ignorance grows as your credibility diminishes)? Are you sure your group is playing the rules correctly? Have you gone to tournaments? What gives?!

Allow me to elaborate: from the point o view of an Imperial Guard player the Assault phase feels too powerful. I accept that this may not be the general consensus but for me that is how it feels.
Assault based armies are not what give me the headache, I have faced down things like multiple DS units that would then assault me no matter what if I did not kill them outright. I have faced down multiple transport assault units.

For me the problem is not so much assault armies as the phase itself. I know that if anything hits my army in assault then whatever they hit is gone.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
That and dedicated assault armies gak all over me if they get close.... Say by Deep Striking or using fast transports.

Master, did you ever change your list in the way that was suggested? It might help out a lot with the assault elements of the enemy.

 Lobukia wrote:
How to immediately lose all credibility in discussing 7th ed 40k... what?! and you play guard to boot.

I've played quiet a few games, even outside the box ones like facing down 30k World Eaters with an IG gun/tank line (with and without a primarch)... it wasn't even fair, and it wasn't the assault armies that died on the vine. Seriously, how are you losing to assault armies as an IG/AM player (one loss once isn't what I'm talking about, if you're making bold statements like "assault is too powerful" I'm assuming this is a repeated trend you've observed... if not, your ignorance grows as your credibility diminishes)? Are you sure your group is playing the rules correctly? Have you gone to tournaments? What gives?!

I generally find with the right use of terrain, DS and not charging into the open in a desperate bid to close the gap, when I have to secure the objective or get a line of sight anyway, enables assault armies to do quite well. If you're complaining about gunline armies and still charge into the open then you're not using them right.

Obviously you have the issue of barrage weapons in guard, especially wvyerns, but that's why it's always clever to have a DS tank killer or MC in your army.