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.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Completely random charges as the default over ideal conditions (like open ground) are a bad game mechanic that doesn't make sense. Imagine if shooting units had to take a leadership check with increasing penalties every 3" from the target just to fire at all and they only got one chance at it as standard. They should have gone back to a constant charge distance individualized for each unit or at worst some combination of constant plus variable with increasing variability for worsening conditions like difficult terrain. It adds nothing to the game and is just randomness for randomness's sake.

It's not a bad mechanic at all. You mean it's a mechanic you don't like.

Well I guess it boils down to do you want to win a game because you outmaneuvered your opponent and engaged their key unit in a decisive assault, breaking their line and halting their battle plan, or do you want to win a game because you rolled an 8 on 2D6 when you needed to?

40K has had fixed assault/charge ranges more than it hasn't, all the way up to 5th, and it's no coincidence that the editions that seem to be generally considered the worst to play are the ones where random charge are a feature.

Didn't those editions also have no premeasuring? Wasn't that a thing?

Maybe the real nerf is somehow in the weapons, or it is the 3" pile in. Don't fall back far enough an bam, you have given up a turn of attacking and still get caught up.

BTW I reckon chainswords will be different to regular close combat weapons. They are going to chew through armour better than your standard knife I reckon.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Completely random charges as the default over ideal conditions (like open ground) are a bad game mechanic that doesn't make sense. Imagine if shooting units had to take a leadership check with increasing penalties every 3" from the target just to fire at all and they only got one chance at it as standard. They should have gone back to a constant charge distance individualized for each unit or at worst some combination of constant plus variable with increasing variability for worsening conditions like difficult terrain. It adds nothing to the game and is just randomness for randomness's sake.

It's not a bad mechanic at all. You mean it's a mechanic you don't like.

Well I guess it boils down to do you want to win a game because you outmaneuvered your opponent and engaged their key unit in a decisive assault, breaking their line and halting their battle plan, or do you want to win a game because you rolled an 8 on 2D6 when you needed to?

40K has had fixed assault/charge ranges more than it hasn't, all the way up to 5th, and it's no coincidence that the editions that seem to be generally considered the worst to play are the ones where random charge are a feature.

Do you like a game where you rolled a 6 to wound when you needed to?

It's about the mitigation of chance, it's built throughout the game and this extra little bit doesn't suddenly revolutionise a game.

You might not like it, fine, but it's really not like it's an objectively terrible design flaw. As has been pointed out in this thread numerous times there are benefits to it.

People feel the need to prove their opinions, sometimes just saying I like / don't like it because of X / Y without calling something "silly" is perfectly fine.

They went with this design choice. Some will like it, some won't.

We have absolutely no idea on balance until we see the whole. I'm sure melee will be perfectly serviceable

ERJAK wrote:
Didn't those editions also have no premeasuring? Wasn't that a thing?

Yeah, but anyone who played those editions enough can now accurately judge distances of up to 8 ft within an inch usually. I remember a store near me had an event where you had to guess the range of some prizes on the other side of a room - the most someone was off was 2". No premeasuring was largely just a thing which hurt new players; even the vets bad at judging distance would surreptitiously use their forearms and memorise how long those were. One of the most pointless rules before 6e, and one of the few great changes 6e brought along.

 warboss wrote:

Youn wrote:
Some randomness to charges has to be in the game. I wish they would have gone with M+1d6 but they didn't.

If you always make it M*2 or M and you have pre-measurement in the game. You will have a recipe for making shooting armies way to powerful. Image Tau with a line of firewarriors in front of a pile of Riptides n them. They can let you get close, pre-measure the distance to a charge. Back up to 1.5" further then you can charge. Shoot you, let you move and back up again, rinse and repeat for a game.

Premeasuring slows down the game and I'm not a fan if it either frankly. I'd personally be fine with removing it in the charge phase or even entirely to a lesser extent if that meant that completely random charges went with it. A semi random charge with no premeasuring is enough dramatic tension and randomness on top of three sequential random rolls to cause casualties.

In every game system I have ever played pre-measuring speeds up games, helps reduce issues between players about distance and is a "good" thing.

Even War Machine have seen the light and included it rather than just allowing it as a semi-exploit.

Eyjio wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

Eyjio wrote:Hormagaunts don't get to have a contingency plan for failing a 4" charge - they just die.

Well then it's a good thing your army doesn't consist of just a single unit of Hormagaunts then, isn't it?

True, it doesn't consist of any at all - why risk the charge when termagants get perfectly good guns?

Risking to end up in firefights with armies that outgun yours that you could have tied down and likely killed with a nice, big unit of Hormagaunts.

I think people are underestimating the new pile in multi-combat. It will be very, very easy to do for large units with a spread out line formation.
"I'm declaring a charge against a unit in the middle of your army. *Wins the charge roll and moves models* "Ooops, looks like the models at the edges of my formation are still closer to those other two units of yours than my initial target, I think they are in combat now too ( ͡• ͜ʖ ͡•)".

Not to mention charging a closer transport where a disembarked unit is sitting right next to it. Spead out the formation of your unit while moving closer in preparation, then charge the transport/drop pod and end up with one or two of your models being closer to the passengers than the transport when the assault phase begins. Without the passengers ever having been able to get off their overwatch.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 warboss wrote:

Youn wrote:
Some randomness to charges has to be in the game. I wish they would have gone with M+1d6 but they didn't.

If you always make it M*2 or M and you have pre-measurement in the game. You will have a recipe for making shooting armies way to powerful. Image Tau with a line of firewarriors in front of a pile of Riptides n them. They can let you get close, pre-measure the distance to a charge. Back up to 1.5" further then you can charge. Shoot you, let you move and back up again, rinse and repeat for a game.

Premeasuring slows down the game and I'm not a fan if it either frankly. I'd personally be fine with removing it in the charge phase or even entirely to a lesser extent if that meant that completely random charges went with it. A semi random charge with no premeasuring is enough dramatic tension and randomness on top of three sequential random rolls to cause casualties.

In every game system I have ever played pre-measuring speeds up games, helps reduce issues between players about distance and is a "good" thing.

Even War Machine have seen the light and included it rather than just allowing it as a semi-exploit.

Yup, I loathe no pre measuring. Let's sit and umm and ahh about if the distance is 8.1 inches or 7.9 inches for 20 minutes before I declare this charge!

Remember than when you pile in you don't need to do it toward the enemy, but in a way to get closer to the enemy compared to your starting position, even by 0,1".
If you have a unit within 3-5" of one i assaulted, it is almost impossible to avoid piling into it, especially with swarmy stuff.

 nintura wrote:
So instead of spreading your models out 2" to avoid blasts, now you gotta spread your units out so they don't get dragged in

How much you need to spread your models depends on how large the assaulting force is.

5 assault marines will not be able to cover very much. 30 orks or 9 bloodcrushers will. This is because as they wrap around to get into base to base with the nearest enemy, they have a better chance of 'clipping' an adjoining unit.

Good thing my melee units also have twin-linked plasma guns. Got my bases covered either way...

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

Eyjio wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

Eyjio wrote:Hormagaunts don't get to have a contingency plan for failing a 4" charge - they just die.

Well then it's a good thing your army doesn't consist of just a single unit of Hormagaunts then, isn't it?

True, it doesn't consist of any at all - why risk the charge when termagants get perfectly good guns?

Risking to end up in firefights with armies that outgun yours.

I think people are underestimating the new pile in multi-combat. It will be very, very easy to do for large units with a spread out line formation.
"I'm declaring a charge against a unit in the middle of your army. *Wins the charge roll and moves models* "Ooops, looks like the models at the edges of my formation are still closer to those other two units of yours than my initial target, I think they are in combat now too :-))))". Not to mention charging a closer transport where a disembarked unit is sitting right next to it. Spead out the formation of your unit while moving closer in preparation, then charge the transport/drop pod and end up with one or two of your models being closer to the passengers than the transport when the assault phase begins. Without the passengers ever having been able to get off their overwatch.

Yeah, the 3" pile in multi-charge definitely seems like a rule that makes more sense once you see it in practice. There's been no issues with it in AoS, a game where I would think it's even more important to avoid getting charged if you don't want to be.

Plus dedicated Assault units hitting on 3s more often, and the ability to choose to activate your more deadly units first, would certainly help previously lackluster units do their job.

 kronk wrote:

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

Absolutely this. Neither the M+6", M+D6 nor the 6"+D6 charge ranges that have been proposed in here would be balanced as high movement units such as jump pack users would have inane charge ranges which would likely enable turn 1 assaults (only way to prevent that with up to 31"

Bikes, jump packs, and such are fast. That's the point.

There could also be a rule for no 1st turn charges and no charging from reserve. Done.

If people think no first turn assaults and no charges from reserve in exchange for a static assault range make the game more tactical and dynamic then I am at a loss for words. Out flank and null deploy or heck, even flying transports are worthless due to that silly mechanic.

Also come on fellas, I played competitively all throughout 5th, charges were annoying as feth then. everything moved 6 like 7th but charges was a flat 6" HALVED through ANY terrain. Only morons deployed their shooty units in a way that assaulter weren't clipping terrain. That made the mac assault 3" just like it is now, only back then you couldn't premeasure. You have no idea how much rage I have witnessed from people failing a 3" charge by the width of a pubic hair. Now, that assault unit like say banshees will more then likely have a 7-8" standard move, plus a run, then an assault which may continue to benefit from fleet. In 5th they moved 6" and charged 6" or as I said usually 3" with no shot at anything further, don't believe me just dig up any old 5th ed battle report on this site and you'll laugh, the average assault from any decent player was from point blank to ensure they were in with no argument. With premeasuring do you realize the amount of gamey induced rage that would occur if a tau player faced orks and he new he could stay just out side that static range and fire his heavy weapons now?

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

changemod wrote:

 nintura wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Yuup. Melee is gonna be a flaming pile of trash, just as expected.
Really looking forward to not using 8th rules for this ugly abomination of a phase.

Seriously. How do you go on living with such a negative view of life and everything in it.

Context applies here:

All week GW have been dropping sly hints that there's some huge new deal in assault that makes the nerf to combat being able to withdraw at will represents.

Then the assault preview comes out, and nope: What we already knew plus a niche-case way of doing a multi-charge whilst only facing one overwatch.

Good thing you have the much more assault army friendly 7th edition ruleset to fall back to now that you announced that you won't be playing 8th edition.
.
.
.
Pffffff, could barely keep a straight face while typing that.

A.k.a. the ruleset that doesn't allow every unit to freely disengage from melee so that the rest of the army can shove 50 billion shots down assaut unit's throat at point blank range?
I know - absolutely horrible. Good thing 8th got this covered.

I'm glad they're porting in the pile in rules from Sigmar. I've already said that Assault armies are going to need to attack all at once to try and shut down as much of the enemy as possible in a single turn, this makes it even easier to do and lowers the risk from unlimited Overwatch.

What I'm most interested about is Strategems. It's the first time we've heard about them, and using a capitol S suggests it's going to be a separate system from Command Points. So far the only thing we know is that it comes from having a battle forged army.

Eyjio wrote:

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:
I don't really get where the panic is coming from. As said before the probability curve of 2D6 is a bell curve. I last actively played in 5th edition (kept up to date with the rules and meta of the 6th and read the rules for the 7th) and back then very few people were complaining about the standardized 6" charge range with very few exceptions such as cavalry (which had a 6" movement to compensate). With the new 2D6 and the +1" bonus factored in, you have an around ~84% change to make that very same 6" charge. You also have a ~9% change to get a TWICE the charge range, with an exponentially increasing probability to get a charge range better than 6". Meanwhile the new minimum charge range, if you roll snake-eyes, is 3", and overall the probability to roll any charge distance below six inches is 16%. Those are goood odds and also mean that most of the time you will have a higher charge range than you did back in the 5th Edition, and that's before facturing in the extra movement some units get in the movement phase that happens prior in the same turn, and there might even be units with a special rule equivalent of the old sprint rule on top of it. People will realize that soon enough when they actually start playing a few games with the new rules (heck, or even test it out a few times with actual minis with the rules we have right now).

I wouldn't say I'm panicking. I'm just disappointed that a highly random system isn't changing when many other issues with the game seem to be fixed. It's like finding a bone shard in a perfectly cooked steak - you'll still have a great meal, but it could have been better pretty easily.

As for 6" charges, whilst you aren't wrong, the chance to fail that same roll in 5th edition was 0% because it was fixed distance. Even if you're only failing 1 in 6 times, that's enough that you'd expect it to happen at least once per game. In a system where the charging unit goes first, that could be hugely impactful on assault vs assault armies (if assault is indeed viable) - it essentially means games can be decided in one roll. I struggle to believe people will find it fun when, having dusted off their terminators, they then lose to Ork boyz because the dice fluffed at a critical moment and got hit in the face 100 times before they could react. It's that sort of situation I want to avoid - IMO, the meat of games should be decided on skill, with luck adding excitement as a spice; they shouldn't be all spice, no meat.

Bullcrap, your looking back with rose tinted glasses mate. No pre measuring and half move for charges through ANY terrain meant TONS of failed charges unless you moved to within point blank. I"d love for you to try out 5th ed charges with premeasuring and see what happens, especially now that we can purchase terrain. I'll just through a defense line at the top of my deployment and now you are charging ~3" over it and where to be with premeasuring. You'll rage quit that game very quickly.

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:

changemod wrote:

 nintura wrote:

Liberal_Perturabo wrote:
Yuup. Melee is gonna be a flaming pile of trash, just as expected.
Really looking forward to not using 8th rules for this ugly abomination of a phase.

Seriously. How do you go on living with such a negative view of life and everything in it.

Context applies here:

All week GW have been dropping sly hints that there's some huge new deal in assault that makes the nerf to combat being able to withdraw at will represents.

Then the assault preview comes out, and nope: What we already knew plus a niche-case way of doing a multi-charge whilst only facing one overwatch.

Good thing you have the much more assault army friendly 7th edition ruleset to fall back to now that you announced that you won't be playing 8th edition.
.
.
.
Pffffff, could barely keep a straight face while typing that.

A.k.a. the ruleset that doesn't allow every unit to freely disengage from melee so that the rest of the army can shove 50 billion shots down assaut unit's throat at point blank range?
I know - absolutely horrible. Good thing 8th got this covered.

Well, sounds you found the perfect edition for your melee armies then. Have fun playing against 7th Edition Eldar, Tau overwatch and Riptides while your casualties get removed from the front of your unit ;-).

 labmouse42 wrote:

 nintura wrote:
So instead of spreading your models out 2" to avoid blasts, now you gotta spread your units out so they don't get dragged in

How much you need to spread your models depends on how large the assaulting force is.

5 assault marines will not be able to cover very much. 30 orks or 9 bloodcrushers will. This is because as they wrap around to get into base to base with the nearest enemy, they have a better chance of 'clipping' an adjoining unit.

Here's the thing: In Sigmar you aren't allowed to "wrap around". If there are two of your guys between the guy you want to pile in and the enemy, then that guy is out of luck and stuck where he is.

Vorian wrote:
Do you like a game where you rolled a 6 to wound when you needed to?

It's about the mitigation of chance, it's built throughout the game and this extra little bit doesn't suddenly revolutionise a game.

You would have a valid point except for two major issues. Both shooting and assault have that same quad level rolling randomness already built in (hit, wound, save, morale) so rolling to wound has nothing to do with a 5th layer of likely rarely mitagble very randdom roll. The second is that a 2d6 to roll is much more subject to extremes than the typical 10-20d6 you get with shooting or close combat. The more dice you add, the less likely an extreme result is. You have 1/9 chance of rolling all ones and twos on a charge likely leading to a complete flub on the roll. Your chances of rolling all 1/2 on all your unit's shooting attack is typically much lower (characters being the exception) or all your melee attacks. The level of randomness is leagues above almost anything else except maybe leadership rolls which are the result of combat and not a precondition for simply getting to do combat. The level of importance of those two dice is also way above that of most close combat rolls as they determine if an entire unit is completely useless for an entire phase. The closest comparison would the required ld check to shoot with increasing penalties with increased range. That adds randomness and you can premeasure in shooting to so what is good for the goose is good for the gander, right? So why not incorporate that as well since those seem to be the only criteria given here for keeping charges random? Because it removes player choice and replaces it with a low number very variable dice roll with disproportionately dire results potentially.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Bullcrap, your looking back with rose tinted glasses mate. No pre measuring and half move for charges through ANY terrain meant TONS of failed charges unless you moved to within point blank. I"d love for you to try out 5th ed charges with premeasuring and see what happens, especially now that we can purchase terrain. I'll just through a defense line at the top of my deployment and now you are charging ~3" over it and where to be with premeasuring. You'll rage quit that game very quickly.

It's not bull, you're describing other issues with 5th. If you were 6" away in open ground, you could not fail that charge. The fact that the terrain rules were horrifically broken doesn't change that, it just meant nobody even bothered in 5th. I'm not proposing to bring back the terrain rules (or the vehicle rules, or the night fight, or the cover rules, or any of the myriad of bad rules) from 5th, I'm just saying that, in a fixed distance game, there was much less variability as to what failed. Sure, measuring a hair out of range was an issue even back then, but that's why I'd propose charging after running for all units - you still get a slight randomisation, it's just not as much as 10" difference and you know whether you can make the charge before you try.

Vorian wrote:

Yup, I loathe no pre measuring. Let's sit and umm and ahh about if the distance is 8.1 inches or 7.9 inches for 20 minutes before I declare this charge!

If your opponent is vacilating for 20 minutes over a charge without premeasuring then he or she is a tfg who would also spend 40 minutes spacing out each unit premeasuring each fig to your squads to minimize your shooting's effectiveness . Bad tabletop manners are NOT a justification for bad game mechanics.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 kodos wrote:
DeusExMachin on GW-Fanworld made some nice graphs to comapere different dice rolls for charge

So someone at GW-Fanworld understands how a bell curve works. Fantastic.

Still doesn't change that 2D6 charge is really silly.

but with the pictures it should be more clear to everyone that if you can choose between several different dice rolls instead of a fixed value 2D6 is the worst option

 Imateria wrote:
What I'm most interested about is Strategems. It's the first time we've heard about them, and using a capitol S suggests it's going to be a separate system from Command Points. So far the only thing we know is that it comes from having a battle forged army.

I'm guessing that Strategems are just the thing you spend Command Points to activate.

 warboss wrote:

Vorian wrote:

Yup, I loathe no pre measuring. Let's sit and umm and ahh about if the distance is 8.1 inches or 7.9 inches for 20 minutes before I declare this charge!

If your opponent is vacilating for 20 minutes over a charge without premeasuring then he or she is a tfg who would also spend 40 minutes spacing out each unit premeasuring each fig to your squads to minimize your shooting's effectiveness . Bad tabletop manners are NOT a justification for bad game mechanics.

Pre-measuring is simply not a bad game mechanic - it works brilliantly in a huge variety of systems and boardgames - well they use squares, hexes etc.

changemod wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:

 nintura wrote:
So instead of spreading your models out 2" to avoid blasts, now you gotta spread your units out so they don't get dragged in

How much you need to spread your models depends on how large the assaulting force is.

5 assault marines will not be able to cover very much. 30 orks or 9 bloodcrushers will. This is because as they wrap around to get into base to base with the nearest enemy, they have a better chance of 'clipping' an adjoining unit.

Here's the thing: In Sigmar you aren't allowed to "wrap around". If there are two of your guys between the guy you want to pile in and the enemy, then that guy is out of luck and stuck where he is.

That doesn't matter when the attacking unit and the assault looks similar to this:



The models at the edges of the stretched out charging unit will still end up closer to the Unit A and C after the charge than the initially charged unit in the middle. As a result they get to move towards those uninvolved units at the beginning of the 'fight' phase and if they are within 3" then they get to suck them into the combat without anything ever getting stuck. Unit A and C never get a change to overwatch either as the player of the red unit never declared a charge against them. This is a massive buff for giant but cheap melee units, especially now that templates are gone.
Sure, those three units can disengage if they are still alive in the next turn, but neither of them gets to do anything but a normal move and the blue player better pray that the rest of his army still has enough firepower to decimate that attacking unit or they will just pull off the same multi-charge trick again and hit first too (in addition to any other charge bonuses that might exist).

 warboss wrote:

Vorian wrote:
Do you like a game where you rolled a 6 to wound when you needed to?

It's about the mitigation of chance, it's built throughout the game and this extra little bit doesn't suddenly revolutionise a game.

You would have a valid point except for two major issues. Both shooting and assault have that same quad level rolling randomness already built in (hit, wound, save, morale) so rolling to wound has nothing to do with a 5th layer of likely rarely mitagble very randdom roll. The second is that a 2d6 to roll is much more subject to extremes than the typical 10-20d6 you get with shooting or close combat. The more dice you add, the less likely an extreme result is. You have 1/9 chance of rolling all ones and twos on a charge likely leading to a complete flub on the roll. Your chances of rolling all 1/2 on all your unit's shooting attack is typically much lower (characters being the exception) or all your melee attacks. The level of randomness is leagues above almost anything else except maybe leadership rolls which are the result of combat and not a precondition for simply getting to do combat. The level of importance of those two dice is also way above that of most close combat rolls as they determine if an entire unit is completely useless for an entire phase. The closest comparison would the required ld check to shoot with increasing penalties with increased range. That adds randomness and you can premeasure in shooting to so what is good for the goose is good for the gander, right? So why not incorporate that as well since those seem to be the only criteria given here for keeping charges random? Because it removes player choice and replaces it with a low number very variable dice roll with disproportionately dire results potentially.

I only read the first line - but no, I'm not making a comment on the amount of randomness. I don't care how many levels there are giving some illusion of more randomness.

There is some randomness throughout the game - just because there is a little bit in this particular case doesn't suddenly make the entire game snakes and ladders.

I hate rolling for charges. It simply makes no sense to me. It doesn't add excitement or drama to the game. Its just stupid. I would know, within the distances involved, whether or not I could make a short distance like that on foot in a certain amount of time. Its also crazy that within that time, I might make it 11 inches, or 5 minutes later, only 3 inches, regardless if someone is indeed shooting at me, or what my leadership is. Honestly this was the one rule I was hoping they would fix and now I might as just stick with that I have.

Actually now that I think about it, if a unit was fired upon before the charge, then rolling for the charge seems very valid, as they would no doubt be reacting to being fired upon while crossing the ground. I think that would be cool, but not as a normal rule.

 kodos wrote:

but with the pictures it should be more clear to everyone that if you can choose between several different dice rolls instead of a fixed value 2D6 is the worst option

I'd definitely choose the more dice/d3 with multiplier option. As I said , I can handle some variability but not completely random 2d6 highly variable roll to determine whether or not a unit can do anything before it acts (unlike ld which happens usually after). That said...its a moot point. The books were likely already printed in China or the UK and were on the boat before the announcement was made. Nothing as major as reworking charging will happen before the annual 2018 40k generals handbook at this point.

If charges work like AOS, melee armies got a pretty huge buff. In AoS only the first charging model needs to end its move within 1/2" of the enemy unit. The rest of your guys can go wherever they want (obviously while maintaining coherency), which means it'll be exceedingly easy to point them at the next closest enemy unit and get a multi-charge without suffering overwatch from the second unit. Happens all the time in AoS. That's huge.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
So close combat attacks are only made on your turn (short of special abilities). That renders things like Unwieldy pointless since your attacks all occur on your turn. While this means you aren't going to be wiping out units on your opponent a turn and it halves the amount attacks you are going to make over the period of the game, I am okay with it.

The ability to make a free 3" move basically means all charge distances have a 6" minimum (snakeeyes+3"+1" you need to be within in order to attack). So that is actually pretty good.

No I believe you both strike still in each other's turn, just whoever made the assault gets to hit first?

Then after first turn, you take it in turns choosing who hits first. Alternate activation of units.

I think I understand it now. If there are multiple combats going on, you each select a unit from any of those combats and make your attacks. Then select a different unit. From the looks of it, the player whose turn it is always chooses first. So if there is only one combat, the turn player goes first.

Overall, I am fine with this. Especially if my Death Company are going to be able to freely bounce into another combat and continue to wreck face. I am hoping Power Fists do additional wounds. Same with Thunder Hammers, though with Concussive gone, I wonder how those two weapons will be differentiated.

Looks like I will need to make Pedro Kantor a Command Squad to run with him. Pistols and Power Weapons for everyone. Possibly some Power Fists. That or he will be rolling with a Terminator Squad in a Land Raider Crusader.

Your making the mistake of assuming things will remain the same as they are now. My bet is they go back to 2nd ed and no longer double strength. A power fist could be +3 strength -2 rend while a thunder hammer could be +4 strength -3 rend. OR they could both be +X strength but one does more rend.

So doesn't this just encourage gunlines to spread out? Something I always did, but this will help gunline players learn to be more mobile which is only going to enrage the melee people because you know guns.