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.

If you're not sure what Alternate Activation is, I suggest checking out Wrath of Kings or Malifaux rules for a sense of it?

How will the game work if you have Alternate Activation but still keep the current phases of Movement, Psychic, Shooting, Assault?

Could this mean that we could see a change to game phases?

My thinking is that since they've said that units that charge go first, we won't see initiative steps. Everyone attacks at once and you count the corpses afterward.

Activation gives back a lot of tactics by choosing what units charge first, like a Jain Zar, or other dedicated assault monsters.

What do you all think?

Naaris wrote:
If you're not sure what Alternate Activation is, I suggest checking out Wrath of Kings or Malifaux rules for a sense of it?

How will the game work if you have Alternate Activation but still keep the current phases of Movement, Psychic, Shooting, Assault?

Could this mean that we could see a change to game phases?

My thinking is that since they've said that units that charge go first, we won't see initiative steps. Everyone attacks at once and you count the corpses afterward.

Activation gives back a lot of tactics by choosing what units charge first, like a Jain Zar, or other dedicated assault monsters.

What do you all think?

Yes, they said this on twitter or facebook or one of the medias

GW announced this in relation to close combat, not entirely sure about the phases in totality though.

Do you mean activation like in Bolt Action? Or what would you foresee so far?

They said it will work like in AOS. So in the combat phase, the person whose turn it is picks a unit and resolves their attacks. Then their opponent chooses a unit and resolves THEIR attacks. This repeated until everyone has activated all their units (so if you have no more units and your opponent does, they activate their remaining).

it provides quite a bit of tactical depth to combat, as the order in which you attack can be beneficial, and it gives the opponent a chance to attack a unit before it can attack back. I assume with the change to charges, any unit that charged that turn can attack before the alternating sequence kicks in.

I don't think they're going to change up the phases or turns to incorporate this, but the assault phase will almost certainly be something similar.

I hope not. I rather like IGO UGO, and from my experience alternating activation comes with it's own issues, like the person with more units having an advantage.

Yes for combat. https://twitter.com/GeekJockPete/status/856938193173827589

Pretty sure the rest of the game is IGOUGO

I'm pretty ok with that. Close combat alternating activation is one of few AOS mechanics that I really like (the other major one is the rend system).

It........doesn't really make a lot of sense, but adds some tactical depth.

Wayniac wrote:
They said it will work like in AOS. So in the combat phase, the person whose turn it is picks a unit and resolves their attacks. Then their opponent chooses a unit and resolves THEIR attacks. This repeated until everyone has activated all their units (so if you have no more units and your opponent does, they activate their remaining).

it provides quite a bit of tactical depth to combat, as the order in which you attack can be beneficial, and it gives the opponent a chance to attack a unit before it can attack back. I assume with the change to charges, any unit that charged that turn can attack before the alternating sequence kicks in.

Uggh, I hate this type of system. It's too swingy.

And it makes there be no disadvantage to having a slow weapon like a powerfist.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
I'm pretty ok with that. Close combat alternating activation is one of few AOS mechanics that I really like (the other major one is the rend system).

It........doesn't really make a lot of sense, but adds some tactical depth.

How does it not make a lot of sense?

Nope. Alternate unit activation isn't coming. Given statements from GW to the effect that "charging units will strike first" there probably isn't even going to be an AoS-style alternating activation combat phase.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Nope. Alternate unit activation isn't coming. Given statements from GW to the effect that "charging units will strike first" there probably isn't even going to be an AoS-style alternating activation combat phase.

GW has said there will be both alternate activations in the combat phase and that chargers will go first. These are not contradictory mechanics. You just resolve all charges first, then alternate with any remaining units or ongoing combats.

Moreover, you can use Command Points to interrupt this sequence, with an example being to cancel out charge priority.

 Formerly Wu wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Nope. Alternate unit activation isn't coming. Given statements from GW to the effect that "charging units will strike first" there probably isn't even going to be an AoS-style alternating activation combat phase.

GW has said there will be both alternate activations in the combat phase and that chargers will go first. These are not contradictory mechanics. You just resolve all charges first, then alternate with any remaining units or ongoing combats.

Moreover, you can use Command Points to interrupt this sequence, with an example being to cancel out charge priority.

So if this is the way it works....

I have 5 units engaged in combat.

Unit A charged Unit 1 this turn.
Unit B charged Unit 2 this turn.
Unit C is still engaged with Unit 3 from last turn.
Unit D is still engaged with Unit 4 from last turn.
Unit E is still engaged with Unit 4 from last turn also.

You're saying, because you charged, we would do Unit A vs Unit 1, then Unit B vs Unit 2 and unit 1 and unit 2 would only be allowed their saves before any other engagements.

Who goes next? Is it my turn because you went twice since you charged? Or is it your turn to choose a 3rd combat because it was your turn originally (since you got the charge off)?

And at that point we just take turns resolving our own attack phase for each of the remaining units?

All very good questions, but I'm not apprehensive about it. Initiative was a pretty clunky mechanic.

I wonder how it would add in traditionally faster units in the matrix? For example if grots charge witches the grots would attack first?

usmcmidn wrote:
I wonder how it would add in traditionally faster units in the matrix? For example if grots charge witches the grots would attack first?

Anything that charges first attacks first, unless either of the units has a special rule that states otherwise.

Nvs wrote:

 Formerly Wu wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Nope. Alternate unit activation isn't coming. Given statements from GW to the effect that "charging units will strike first" there probably isn't even going to be an AoS-style alternating activation combat phase.

GW has said there will be both alternate activations in the combat phase and that chargers will go first. These are not contradictory mechanics. You just resolve all charges first, then alternate with any remaining units or ongoing combats.

Moreover, you can use Command Points to interrupt this sequence, with an example being to cancel out charge priority.

So if this is the way it works....

I have 5 units engaged in combat.

Unit A charged Unit 1 this turn.
Unit B charged Unit 2 this turn.
Unit C is still engaged with Unit 3 from last turn.
Unit D is still engaged with Unit 4 from last turn.
Unit E is still engaged with Unit 4 from last turn also.

You're saying, because you charged, we would do Unit A vs Unit 1, then Unit B vs Unit 2 and unit 1 and unit 2 would only be allowed their saves before any other engagements.

Who goes next? Is it my turn because you went twice since you charged? Or is it your turn to choose a 3rd combat because it was your turn originally (since you got the charge off)?

And at that point we just take turns resolving our own attack phase for each of the remaining units?

Think of it this way:

1.) Charging units attack, roll hits, wounds, and then opponent saves and removes casualties.
2.) Player whose turn it nominates a unit to attack, that unit roll hits, wounds, and then his opponent saves and removes casualties.
3.) The other player gets to nominate one of his units to attack, that unit roll hits, wounds, and then his opponent saves and removes casualties.
4.) repeat two and three until all units in CC have acted.

 Grimgold wrote:

Nvs wrote:

 Formerly Wu wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Nope. Alternate unit activation isn't coming. Given statements from GW to the effect that "charging units will strike first" there probably isn't even going to be an AoS-style alternating activation combat phase.

GW has said there will be both alternate activations in the combat phase and that chargers will go first. These are not contradictory mechanics. You just resolve all charges first, then alternate with any remaining units or ongoing combats.

Moreover, you can use Command Points to interrupt this sequence, with an example being to cancel out charge priority.

So if this is the way it works....

I have 5 units engaged in combat.

Unit A charged Unit 1 this turn.
Unit B charged Unit 2 this turn.
Unit C is still engaged with Unit 3 from last turn.
Unit D is still engaged with Unit 4 from last turn.
Unit E is still engaged with Unit 4 from last turn also.

You're saying, because you charged, we would do Unit A vs Unit 1, then Unit B vs Unit 2 and unit 1 and unit 2 would only be allowed their saves before any other engagements.

Who goes next? Is it my turn because you went twice since you charged? Or is it your turn to choose a 3rd combat because it was your turn originally (since you got the charge off)?

And at that point we just take turns resolving our own attack phase for each of the remaining units?

Think of it this way:

1.) Charging units attack, roll hits, wounds, and then opponent saves and removes casualties.
2.) Player whose turn it nominates a unit to attack, that unit roll hits, wounds, and then his opponent saves and removes casualties.
3.) The other player gets to nominate one of his units to attack, that unit roll hits, wounds, and then his opponent saves and removes casualties.
4.) repeat two and three until all units in CC have acted.

Has to be what they're thinking about. However, i wonder whether we wouldn't miss the fact that sope unit might be able to strike first according to the lore. On the one hand, it would be extremely interesting for orks for example and add and overall make cc more interesting (and surely give close combat zrmy an equal chance against long range oriented ones), but on the other hand it isn't that logical according to the fact that all beings in 40k aren't the same and tend to have supernatural abilities compared to a human being etc. So I'm quite split on that point.

I don't like this for the sole reason that some units are meant to strike quicker than others and is their advantage, ie Harlequins. Those powerful weapons need a downside, speed was one of them.

 biggie_reg wrote:
I don't like this for the sole reason that some units are meant to strike quicker than others and is their advantage, ie Harlequins. Those powerful weapons need a downside, speed was one of them.

Agreed, that's what I was getting at. If a blob of conscripts charge some Eldar are the poorly trained conscripts attacking first because they charged? I am very curious as to how the rules will play out. I guess we all have to wait and see.

 biggie_reg wrote:
I don't like this for the sole reason that some units are meant to strike quicker than others and is their advantage, ie Harlequins. Those powerful weapons need a downside, speed was one of them.

If that's the case, then Harlequins will likely have special rules to reflect that. Even better, a Harlequin's way of reflecting speed can be different from a Wych's.

Agreed, that's what I was getting at. If a blob of conscripts charge some Eldar are the poorly trained conscripts attacking first because they charged?

What's the issue with that? An uncoordinated but aggressive human wave should have the potential to overwhelm the Eldar, if they're lucky enough to catch them in the first place. Right now, that's a flat impossibility.

usmcmidn wrote:

 biggie_reg wrote:
I don't like this for the sole reason that some units are meant to strike quicker than others and is their advantage, ie Harlequins. Those powerful weapons need a downside, speed was one of them.

Agreed, that's what I was getting at. If a blob of conscripts charge some Eldar are the poorly trained conscripts attacking first because they charged? I am very curious as to how the rules will play out. I guess we all have to wait and see.

If the conscripts manage to somehow sneak up upon the harlequins with the dancers movement, they've likely messed something up to begin with as a horde of IG run them down.

This could see the introduction of the old Fantasy rule Always Strikes First into 40k. That handles the units that should do so and even has what it does in the name.

I imagine harlequin will have hit and run so they can charge every time their turn comes up. Also, we don't know the rules for unwieldy yet, Maybe they get a minus to hit, that would do some work towards evening it out.

Example: a ten man terminator squad that hits on 3's normally hitting on 4s with a power fist, if they get 20 attacks with a power weapon they will hit 13.2 times, but with power fists they would only hit 10 times, so they lost almost three peoples worth of hits at 1.32 hits per person.

I'm sure GWs already trod over this issue thoroughly, so whatever their solution to unwieldy weapons is I'm sure it will make sense from a math point of view.

 Grimgold wrote:
I imagine harlequin will have hit and run so they can charge every time their turn comes up. Also, we don't know the rules for unwieldy yet, Maybe they get a minus to hit, that would do some work towards evening it out.

Example: a ten man terminator squad that hits on 3's normally hitting on 4s with a power fist, if they get 20 attacks with a power weapon they will hit 13.2 times, but with power fists they would only hit 10 times, so they lost almost three peoples worth of hits at 1.32 hits per person.

I'm sure GWs already trod over this issue thoroughly, so whatever their solution to unwieldy weapons is I'm sure it will make sense from a math point of view.

More than likely they have just adjusted unwieldy weapon's prior stats and models cost.

 Grey Templar wrote:


And it makes there be no disadvantage to having a slow weapon like a powerfist.

Except you know, costing three-four times as much as a standard weapon.

In this "anything can hurt anything" edition the extra strength and armour penetration of a power fist is less necessary. If you mob a Dreadnought even simple power weapons (probably S as user, AP-2) is capable of bringing one down. If power weapons keep their distinct stat line the power maul, S+2 AP-1 will probably become king of power weapons.

Mmmmmm not sure how I feel about this, if this is the case, best start is going to probably be running min squads so you can utilize that strike first in the charge.

Personally I hate the Back and forth, simply because it give you no chance to fight back. If you had say marine on marine, i4 all wounds are done at once, vs now, group A takes out half of group one, one has no chance now of winning that fight. It's like with AoS, the second the engaged unit starts to loose, it's game over for that unit.

If they port this rule over, I'm suspecting 40k games are going to be like AoS games, screws objectives, doglike in the middle, and won't last past turn 4 on average.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
If they port this rule over, I'm suspecting 40k games are going to be like AoS games, screws objectives, doglike in the middle, and won't last past turn 4 on average.

Or you actually paly the objectives and actually have a fun game that requires thinking