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.

v0iddrgn wrote:
The reason there's a random distance rolled is because we play a game in which outcomes are determined by dice. It wouldn't be a very fun "dice" game you removed the dice from it.

That doesn't address insaniak's point at all.

Movment is fixed.
Shooting has a fixed range.
Why are running/charging random?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:
The reason there's a random distance rolled is because we play a game in which outcomes are determined by dice. It wouldn't be a very fun "dice" game you removed the dice from it.

That doesn't address insaniak's point at all.

Movment is fixed.
Shooting has a fixed range.
Why are running/charging random?

Also why isn't there reverse overwatch? If someone shoots at you, you should be able to roll a d6 and see if you can make it in to range of them. Same logic applies really, if they have time to take a snap shot at you while you are running at them, you should have time to try and dive in to melee to stop being shot.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:
The reason there's a random distance rolled is because we play a game in which outcomes are determined by dice. It wouldn't be a very fun "dice" game you removed the dice from it.

That doesn't address insaniak's point at all.

Movment is fixed.
Shooting has a fixed range.
Why are running/charging random?

Because if every thing related to weapon ranges and movement is fixed, then Warhammer becomes a game for architects, and to see who is better at measuring and calculating fixed distances. I don't like specifically the 2d6 for charge, but I can totally understand why they want to add randomness to the movement system of the game.

Then why not something that isn't totally debilitating should you fail. The difference between rolling a 2" and rolling a 12" if vast. Game changingly vast.

Manoeuvre and positioning need to be important. Randomising such a core part of the game (HTH) in every step just seems like bad design to me.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:
The reason there's a random distance rolled is because we play a game in which outcomes are determined by dice. It wouldn't be a very fun "dice" game you removed the dice from it.

That doesn't address insaniak's point at all.

Movment is fixed.
Shooting has a fixed range.
Why are running/charging random?

Shooting has a fixed ranged, but some weapons have random numbers of attacks, and almost all weapons have you roll dice instead of adding up a fixed number of wounds.

Running and Charging, in essence, are like the rolling-to-hit and rolling-to-wound of Movement - the chaotic variables that, added to the reliable fixed element, provide a balance of reliability and chaos that some people enjoy when gaming.

I know I was guilty of it two posts ago, but let's all remember to stay on topic here guys! Let's make a thread about random charges in General Discussion, aye?

Please do not make these kinds of posts in colored texts - moderators use that to give in-thread warnings (like this one).

Thanks,

Manchu

Edit: aaaaand I'm stopping.

I have to say my enthusiasm is slipping. GW has already failed to fix two issues (in my eyes), that being random run distances, and random charge distances. Also, they've created new problems with magic infinite overwatch and retreating from combat (RIP tarpits).

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Running and Charging, in essence, are like the rolling-to-hit and rolling-to-wound of Movement

No, they're not. Rolling to hit and rolling to wound are the rolling to hit and rolling to wound (for HTH combat that is). They're adding a further random step to the process. It's inane.

Edit - nothing to see here.

 Verviedi wrote:
I have to say my enthusiasm is slipping. GW has already failed to fix two issues (in my eyes), that being random run distances, and random charge distances. Also, they've created new problems with magic infinite overwatch and retreating from combat (RIP tarpits).

How does the ability to retreat form combat eliminate tarpits?

If he retreats instead of attacking your tarpit, he loses his shooting attack and charge. If something else doesn't kill your tarpit, you just envelop him or charge him on your turn. Still sounds rather tarpit like to me. Heck, you've even gained the advantage of being able to shoot him before you reengage in close combat.

ideally if you can get within your base movement rate of the charge target, you should be able to automatically make it in, but if its outside of that value, then you roll 2d6. This way, no more failed charges due to silly snake eyes coming up with assault marines are only 4 inches away. Also, tarpits can still tarpit, stick 50 guardsmen in the middle of the board and just be in the way. Like its been said, if they fall back, counter charge and/or shoot them to pieces., I like it, it adds tactical depth by being able to extract units as the battle changes, but at a risk.

Actually I do find it quite the comfort knowing that even if you fail the charge you at least get closer. All of a sudden eating a round of bad overwatch can still pay off. Most close combat units suffer the most from never even making it to combat, after all.

 Twoshoes23 wrote:
ideally if you can get within your base movement rate of the charge target, you should be able to automatically make it in, but if its outside of that value, then you roll 2d6.

Oh I like that idea quite a bit. Simulating charges across longer distances might not be fast enough to make it in time, whereas those who are within 'normal' movement ranges have no issue getting in.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Twoshoes23 wrote:
ideally if you can get within your base movement rate of the charge target, you should be able to automatically make it in, but if its outside of that value, then you roll 2d6.

Oh I like that idea quite a bit. Simulating charges across longer distances might not be fast enough to make it in time, whereas those who are within 'normal' movement ranges have no issue getting in.

We have a year then to spam GW social media with this to make it to 8th edition 2.0 in 2018!

(And I'm not saying this in a sarcastic way. Is actually the reason I'm not as angry or troubled as I can be with changes that I don't like, because the posibility exists to change them in perios of 1 year, instead of waiting to the next edition!)

For those not liking apparent randomness in their favorite phase of the game off of partial knowledge of the system...

...we'll have command points... which in most systems are used to remove or mitigate randomness in limited quantities and force a level of decision making into the game.

I'd wait until we know what those do before spilling your drink and cheese all over this and similar threads.

I mean, we only have a percentage of all the rules, so any moaning and groaning is kind of premature anyways. I say we all enjoy the very fact that we are getting these kind of previews in the first place!

 Lobukia wrote:
For those not liking apparent randomness in their favorite phase of the game off of partial knowledge of the system...

...we'll have command points... which in most systems are used to remove or mitigate randomness in limited quantities and force a level of decision making into the game.

I'd wait until we know what those do before spilling your drink and cheese all over this and similar threads.

I'm really looking forward to this mechanic and hearing more about it.

 Rippy wrote:
I know I was guilty of it two posts ago, but let's all remember to stay on topic here guys! Let's make a thread about random charges in General Discussion, aye?

Are you a mod? The topic is the news of the 8th edition changes, today's topic specifically about the charge phase changes. Discussing anything about 8th ed news, and especially charging is on topic.

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
I know I was guilty of it two posts ago, but let's all remember to stay on topic here guys! Let's make a thread about random charges in General Discussion, aye?

are you a mod?

No but I am worried about this thread being closed down like the last one due to off topic discussion. No one has to listen to what I wrote, but it would be appreciated if people would take their discussion to the correct area.

opinions you don't agree with about the topic, aren't inherently offtopic. They're just not the specific topic you want being discussed

Discussing the release is on topic. 3 people debating what they would prefer the rules to be is off topic. It's not hard.

Still would like to see someone argue how relating distance to movement could be balanced when you have such a huge gulf of movement values (4-12" at least, and most likely it will top out at 16" like AoS), without making fast units too fast or slow units too slow. The only solution I like that avoids this issue is making charges 6+D6" regardless of movement stat.

 Mymearan wrote:
Still would like to see someone argue how relating distance to movement could be balanced when you have such a huge gulf of movement values (4-12" at least, and most likely it will top out at 16" like AoS), without making fast units too fast or slow units too slow. The only solution I like that avoids this issue is making charges 6+D6" regardless of movement stat.

If we insist on random charge distances, D6 + movement seems fine to me.

What's the point in having a movement stat if they're just going to ignore it

Personally I would have gotten rid of the "charge phase" entirely, if you want to charge, do it in the movement phase and make it 2xM or 2xM+D6.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rippy wrote:
No one has to listen to what I wrote, but it would be appreciated if people would take their discussion to the correct area.

It's best to leave the modding to the mods, report a post if you think it's too off topic, trying to mod when you don't have a mod tag under your name is just annoying.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:
Still would like to see someone argue how relating distance to movement could be balanced when you have such a huge gulf of movement values (4-12" at least, and most likely it will top out at 16" like AoS), without making fast units too fast or slow units too slow. The only solution I like that avoids this issue is making charges 6+D6" regardless of movement stat.

If we insist on random charge distances, D6 + movement seems fine to me.

What's the point in having a movement stat if they're just going to ignore it

Personally I want there to be some random element to avoid people playing chicken by skirting right outside charge range to remain completely safe, which besides feeling very "gamey" and immersion breaking also slows down the game. 2D6 might be excessive though. Just a spontaneous thought, if faster units were to get some charge benefit from their high movement, how about mitigating the randomness somewhat? Something like securing a certain amount of charge range (which could still top out at 12") the faster the unit?

Rippy wrote:Discussing the release is on topic. 3 people debating what they would prefer the rules to be is off topic. It's not hard.

One of those people is an actual mod, insaniak seems to think he's on topic. Perhaps debating the merits of the rules of 8th that we know, are in fact on topic for a news thread about the new rules?

Random charges are more fine when there's not a slew of mechanisms in place to prevent getting to melee in the first place, like in 8th fantasy (though the transition was extremely badly received). Now we don't have all the information yet, but in 7th getting to assault was painful and random charges compounded that. Don't know why it can't be 6" again.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:
Still would like to see someone argue how relating distance to movement could be balanced when you have such a huge gulf of movement values (4-12" at least, and most likely it will top out at 16" like AoS), without making fast units too fast or slow units too slow. The only solution I like that avoids this issue is making charges 6+D6" regardless of movement stat.

If we insist on random charge distances, D6 + movement seems fine to me.

What's the point in having a movement stat if they're just going to ignore it

Personally I would have gotten rid of the "charge phase" entirely, if you want to charge, do it in the movement phase and make it 2xM or 2xM+D6.

Watch out bro, opinions like those got Crabz banned for 2 days for being impolite

Seems to me that if they want to avoid shooting units being able to skirt out of assault range, they should make shooting ranges random and let assault have a static charge distance

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:
Still would like to see someone argue how relating distance to movement could be balanced when you have such a huge gulf of movement values (4-12" at least, and most likely it will top out at 16" like AoS), without making fast units too fast or slow units too slow. The only solution I like that avoids this issue is making charges 6+D6" regardless of movement stat.

If we insist on random charge distances, D6 + movement seems fine to me.

What's the point in having a movement stat if they're just going to ignore it

Personally I would have gotten rid of the "charge phase" entirely, if you want to charge, do it in the movement phase and make it 2xM or 2xM+D6.

I guess it makes quite big difference if you are able to move 12" or 6" closer to the enemy on your movement phase.

That said, I like 2d6 charging, it puts bit of risk and reward to the charge, especially with the overwatch. And also it promotes clever playing as you're able to mitigate the influence of randomness with the positioning of your models.

 jamopower wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:
Still would like to see someone argue how relating distance to movement could be balanced when you have such a huge gulf of movement values (4-12" at least, and most likely it will top out at 16" like AoS), without making fast units too fast or slow units too slow. The only solution I like that avoids this issue is making charges 6+D6" regardless of movement stat.

If we insist on random charge distances, D6 + movement seems fine to me.

What's the point in having a movement stat if they're just going to ignore it

Personally I would have gotten rid of the "charge phase" entirely, if you want to charge, do it in the movement phase and make it 2xM or 2xM+D6.

I guess it makes quite big difference if you are able to move 12" or 6" closer to the enemy on your movement phase.

It would just be like the running we used to have back in 2nd edition...

Move M, shoot.

Move 2xM, don't get to shoot.

"...you generate command points: one use only. re-roll dice, interupt chargers going first mentioned..."

Seems there's a possibility that the careful use of a command point here and there could really change the combat phase.