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.

2d6 was the only thing keeping people awake during the assault phase in the past 2 editions and while GW has made an effort to make close combat NOT the worst phase of the game, I think it needs all the gimmicks it can get to make it interesting.

You don't know what the movement is for any unit yet outside a few. How can you say Movement +D6 is a better idea?

 Dr. Cheesesteak wrote:
Just curious, to all those people saying it should just be D6, 2D6, etc (i.e. no double M or M + x, etc), why do you think charges should be completely random? What justification, whether mechanically (purely random determiners are good for the phase) or fluffly (dudes trip over rocks while charging)?

Sincere question, I truly don't understand the support of a 100% random charge range (not counting the 1" melee range) w/ no static addition or purely static mechanic (like, I believe, literally every other skirmish/wargame besides GW games has?).

Speaking of 8th only and the changes that are to come, I believe 2D6 keeps all units equal at the start of balancing. After that, you begin to identify which units are "assault" units and grant them bonuses to charging, such as rerolls, additional dice, or minimum distance charges, or something else unique to that unit. With these changes you have a system where a Guardsman with a lasgun charging is a risk, while a Berzerker with a chainaxe and pistol charging is far less risky. There is nothing wrong with 2D6 charge distance for all units when the dedicated assault units get bonuses to mitigate the risk (just look at AoS if you want examples).

Not everything needs the ability to charge reliably and I am glad GW understands this.

2D6 is fine. Charging units are not going to be going from a standing start so those fast units will be getting to charge sooner then the slower ones anyway.

Also (and this might change) when they gave the overview of movement the new version of running is only at the expense of shooting so a pure assault unit is going M + D6 + 2D6.

You also need to take into account momentum and stamina. Fast creatures only normally keep their speed for a short time and then slow to a crawl. A cheetah goes flat out for a few minutes tops then needs a rest, a husky runs for hours. So your Hormagaunt has gone charging across the battle field and may have burned up to much of its reserves where as the Terminator just keeps plodding on building speed as he goes.

We also don't know if some units will get buffs/nurfs for this like jump packs being 3D6 and Oblitorators gets on D6 or 2 D3.

 Dr. Cheesesteak wrote:
Just curious, to all those people saying it should just be D6, 2D6, etc (i.e. no double M or M + x, etc), why do you think charges should be completely random? What justification, whether mechanically (purely random determiners are good for the phase) or fluffly (dudes trip over rocks while charging)?

Sincere question, I truly don't understand the support of a 100% random charge range (not counting the 1" melee range) w/ no static addition or purely static mechanic (like, I believe, literally every other skirmish/wargame besides GW games has?).

If you go based off M the rich get richer and movement across the field gets insane (and I play bikes... a lot... It'd be bad). If its double M, then rapid fire becomes pointless... just sit at 13" and charge..

 Dr. Cheesesteak wrote:
Just curious, to all those people saying it should just be D6, 2D6, etc (i.e. no double M or M + x, etc), why do you think charges should be completely random? What justification, whether mechanically (purely random determiners are good for the phase) or fluffly (dudes trip over rocks while charging)?

Sincere question, I truly don't understand the support of a 100% random charge range (not counting the 1" melee range) w/ no static addition or purely static mechanic (like, I believe, literally every other skirmish/wargame besides GW games has?).

So, first off, I'm explicitly voicing opposition to a M+D6, or M+anything mechanic. I don't think a 25" minimum move+charge range is good for the game in any way, because if you can guarantee a turn one assault across the no man's land, especially with charging units striking first, the game will become about who can roll higher to go first.

Remember, it's not just the 2D6 you moved during the charge phase, it's also the distance you moved in your movement phase. So it's really a M+2d6 threat range. If you had a M+D6 move in the charge phase, it would be a 2M+D6 threat range. You can do the math for yourself on this

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
So, first off, I'm explicitly voicing opposition to a M+D6, or M+anything mechanic. I don't think a 25" minimum move+charge range is good for the game in any way, because if you can guarantee a turn one assault across the no man's land, especially with charging units striking first, the game will become about who can roll higher to go first.

Remember, it's not just the 2D6 you moved during the charge phase, it's also the distance you moved in your movement phase. So it's really a M+2d6 threat range. If you had a M+D6 move in the charge phase, it would be a 2M+D6 threat range. You can do the math for yourself on this

A good point.

Another thing to consider against this is the longest Movement ranges will likely be limited from being able to Charge in the first place. Think how much Charging a Dark Eldar Raider, Storm Raven, or Swooping Hive Tyrant do while moving so fast.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Dr. Cheesesteak wrote:
Just curious, to all those people saying it should just be D6, 2D6, etc (i.e. no double M or M + x, etc), why do you think charges should be completely random? What justification, whether mechanically (purely random determiners are good for the phase) or fluffly (dudes trip over rocks while charging)?

Sincere question, I truly don't understand the support of a 100% random charge range (not counting the 1" melee range) w/ no static addition or purely static mechanic (like, I believe, literally every other skirmish/wargame besides GW games has?).

So, first off, I'm explicitly voicing opposition to a M+D6, or M+anything mechanic. I don't think a 25" minimum move+charge range is good for the game in any way, because if you can guarantee a turn one assault across the no man's land, especially with charging units striking first, the game will become about who can roll higher to go first.

Remember, it's not just the 2D6 you moved during the charge phase, it's also the distance you moved in your movement phase. So it's really a M+2d6 threat range. If you had a M+D6 move in the charge phase, it would be a 2M+D6 threat range. You can do the math for yourself on this

Yeah, i get that the charge phase is just a proxy extension of the movement phase in this case. But I meant more so just in a vacuum. It actually makes me think even more of the phase order here. If we go by what GW has revealed in order, it's Movement -> Psychic -> Shooting -> Charge -> Fight? I suppose random charges AFTER all those phases makes more sense than say if you had to declare charge during movement.

Anyway, I get you still get the advantage of M, before other phases. And I get there are other factors that can give CC-oriented units bonuses to make up for a short charge. But I still think a fast unit should see the benefit of that speed during a charge. Maybe it'll translate better once the full rules are out and games start getting played.

Random, because the ground isn't actually nice and flat. It may be rough or bumpy and uneven, and people might slip or trip. Random captures those vagaries where the guy falls flat on his face.

And d6, because it's stupid that the far future is full of idiots who want to get closer to the enemies guns... better they get cut down at range.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
So, first off, I'm explicitly voicing opposition to a M+D6, or M+anything mechanic. I don't think a 25" minimum move+charge range is good for the game in any way, because if you can guarantee a turn one assault across the no man's land, especially with charging units striking first, the game will become about who can roll higher to go first.

Remember, it's not just the 2D6 you moved during the charge phase, it's also the distance you moved in your movement phase. So it's really a M+2d6 threat range. If you had a M+D6 move in the charge phase, it would be a 2M+D6 threat range. You can do the math for yourself on this

A good point.

Another thing to consider against this is the longest Movement ranges will likely be limited from being able to Charge in the first place. Think how much Charging a Dark Eldar Raider, Storm Raven, or Swooping Hive Tyrant do while moving so fast.

Okay, I just looked at Shadow War Armageddon.

Seraphim [and other jump troops] have 8" move speed.

So, with M+D6 charge range, jump troops reach 18"-23", avg 20.5", which isn't nearly as bad. It's about what it is for them now [14"-24", avg 19"], and more reliable. With the 2d6 charge range and movement stat, we get 11"-21", avg. 16"

Regular Eldar get 5" or 6", which puts them to 9"-19", avg. 14", or 14"-19", avg. 16.5" with M+D6 for charging.

Regular Marines get 4", which puts them to 7"-17", avg. 12", but 9"-15", avg. 11.5" with M+D6 for charging.


Note the magnification effect M+D6 has on threat range between, Eldar, Marines, and Jump Marines. This places a fairly hard limit on how fast a thing can be at all.

Assuming that 8th edition doesn't really add much we aren't aware of, I would like a more reliable assault distance like Move+d6. However, I can totally understand with players that don't want first turn charges. Without few, very tricky/point pricey exceptions I am with them.

I couldn't find it in a quick look of the rules, but can anyone tell me if the assaulting unit has to have line of sight before charging and or must charge in a straight line? I would assume so, but that might be applying different rules to 40K. If 40K doesn't have this, it really should which could help a little turn one charges well at least for the active player of the bottom of the turn. I also like these rules as it incentivizes a ranged army player to want to add more LOS blocking terrain, and I am all about getting more terrain on the table help or hurt me. In addition, with the change to the assaulting unit attacking first, I would like to see an exception to this for charging through terrain to include assaulting higher ground (like 3-4 inches up) which would see both sides attacking simultaneously (ala Bolt Action and the like). Although, it still won't help those units with poor close quarters combat abilities without heaps of luck.

Something that could also help but isn't possible with IGOUGO games is having everything start off the table. I really like games that do this as it makes getting to the game faster and essentially adds 2 feet to the width of the table.

Ultimately, even as an assault-ish army player, I am pretty okay with 2d6 charges. I am always going to try on a 7" or less and am willing to try for up to 9" when desperate. Plus, I go a bunch of transports to ferry them across the battlefield in any event.

My preference is to move charging back into the Movement phase (ala 2nd Edition), and have it as a flat double Movement.

Simple, removes the ridiculously huge random variable, and also removes the complaint about assault units getting to shoot and fight close combat in the same turn.

Personally, I'd prefer something like: 2D6" charge, but if the result is bad, you can swap the value rolled for your Move stat, in exchange for some kind of penalty.

I love how this thread was started as a 'EVERYONE THINKS 2D6 IS TARRIBAD... '

but almost 50% of the poll is people not minding 2d6 charge


did lol

2d6 for an important moment like whether or not 15 death company get to swing at all is dumb.

I was really hoping for SW:A's phase order on this. Move or double move to run/charge, shoot (the melee guys with pistols could shoot here,) fight.

The issue with random charge range is that it sometimes ends games on a stupid roll. Sometimes 15 death company trip over a rock and get obliterated next turn without doing any damage, sometimes they hop out from behind a wall 12" away and all turn into Usain Bolt and crash into your lines, and you take massive losses from a single roll going weird.

Something as important as "does this melee murder squad get to swing at all?" needs to have a more stable and sane method of determination. I'm all for going back to set charge range, or reducing the random in some way like making minimums based on move or something. I don't care what, just not wild 2d6.

The charge distance should be 6+d6 or you could make it 3d6 and keep the maximum distance you can move 12 inches. You end up with the same max distance, there's still randomness, yet there is some reliability now. Bikes potentially charging 2 inches is unacceptable and a bad game mechanic.

I love how all of these people are so adamantly for 2d6 charge ranges because the units they really want to use won't benefit the most from them. Such a selfish reason, yet ignoring the fact that your assault unit will still be better off then before with some insurance and guaranteed distance on your charge range.

Now that pistols have been given a distinct use in combat, there's no reason to retain the arbitrary distinction between movement and charges. They could easily just have a charge move take place in the movement phase as a run, doubling the range of movement.

We need random charge range just as much as we need random shooting range. And if we have one, we should have the other.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Dr. Cheesesteak wrote:
Just curious, to all those people saying it should just be D6, 2D6, etc (i.e. no double M or M + x, etc), why do you think charges should be completely random? What justification, whether mechanically (purely random determiners are good for the phase) or fluffly (dudes trip over rocks while charging)?

Sincere question, I truly don't understand the support of a 100% random charge range (not counting the 1" melee range) w/ no static addition or purely static mechanic (like, I believe, literally every other skirmish/wargame besides GW games has?).

So, first off, I'm explicitly voicing opposition to a M+D6, or M+anything mechanic. I don't think a 25" minimum move+charge range is good for the game in any way, because if you can guarantee a turn one assault across the no man's land, especially with charging units striking first, the game will become about who can roll higher to go first.

Remember, it's not just the 2D6 you moved during the charge phase, it's also the distance you moved in your movement phase. So it's really a M+2d6 threat range. If you had a M+D6 move in the charge phase, it would be a 2M+D6 threat range. You can do the math for yourself on this

Doesn't have to be this way.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fafnir wrote:
Now that pistols have been given a distinct use in combat, there's no reason to retain the arbitrary distinction between movement and charges. They could easily just have a charge move take place in the movement phase as a run, doubling the range of movement.

We need random charge range just as much as we need random shooting range. And if we have one, we should have the other.

This.
Declare charges in movement phase, 2x movement taking terrain into account - done.
Some units might get a bonus, or a Waagh bonus, or another unit/army specific modification, but as a base this works.

fine with 2d6 plus 1" plus whatever bonuses dedicated assault units are going to get, plus whatever variable pile in distances we'll get. like it said in the assault phase article, a 3 inch pile in that can be used to pull in units that you did not charge, denying them overwatch is amazing. combine that with most likely variable pile in distances a la AOS and assault will be fun.

GodDamUser wrote:
I love how this thread was started as a 'EVERYONE THINKS 2D6 IS TARRIBAD... '

but almost 50% of the poll is people not minding 2d6 charge


did lol

fifty percent of the people responding probably never played 2nd edition,
or for that matter ever used any mechanic other than 2d6 random charge distance.
Confirmation bias - we see what we know and we think that it is right...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cheebs wrote:
fine with 2d6 plus 1" plus whatever bonuses dedicated assault units are going to get, plus whatever variable pile in distances we'll get. like it said in the assault phase article, a 3 inch pile in that can be used to pull in units that you did not charge, denying them overwatch is amazing. combine that with most likely variable pile in distances a la AOS and assault will be fun.

Everything and everyone in a swirling vortex of 1" bubbles in the center, huh?
Yeah, sounds like a card game, "War".

Used to be that unit coherency mitigated templates.
Now, everyone will be measuring units to keep them 4.34" away from their other units so that they can't get dragged into a mess in the middle of the table.

 jeff white wrote:

fifty percent of the people responding probably never played 2nd edition,
or for that matter ever used any mechanic other than 2d6 random charge distance.
Confirmation bias - we see what we know and we think that it is right...

Hell I have played since 2nd Ed.. and have been playing Tyranids every edition...

So been declaring charges before movement, at double move rate.. to having 12" charge for hormagaunts.. then 6" to having to roll 2d6 for charge range. In the end have no real issue with 2d6 charging just means that I need to think tactics on chance to fail

Declaring charges? At that rate, let's go back to declaring shooting targets, too! And using the 2-D acetate targeter against large-based models!

ScarVet101 wrote:
2D6 is fine. Charging units are not going to be going from a standing start so those fast units will be getting to charge sooner then the slower ones anyway.

Also (and this might change) when they gave the overview of movement the new version of running is only at the expense of shooting so a pure assault unit is going M + D6 + 2D6.

You also need to take into account momentum and stamina. Fast creatures only normally keep their speed for a short time and then slow to a crawl. A cheetah goes flat out for a few minutes tops then needs a rest, a husky runs for hours. So your Hormagaunt has gone charging across the battle field and may have burned up to much of its reserves where as the Terminator just keeps plodding on building speed as he goes.

We also don't know if some units will get buffs/nurfs for this like jump packs being 3D6 and Oblitorators gets on D6 or 2 D3.

They actually said on facebook no charging after an advance.

GodDamUser wrote:
I love how this thread was started as a 'EVERYONE THINKS 2D6 IS TARRIBAD... '

but almost 50% of the poll is people not minding 2d6 charge


did lol

Talk about a thread backfire!

As a BA and Nid player, 2D6 charge was never the problem. It was everything else about the assault phase that changed from 5th to 6th/7th. Thus far 8th seems to have fixed all them. All thats left is wound allocation...

 Fafnir wrote:
Now that pistols have been given a distinct use in combat, there's no reason to retain the arbitrary distinction between movement and charges. They could easily just have a charge move take place in the movement phase as a run, doubling the range of movement.

We need random charge range just as much as we need random shooting range. And if we have one, we should have the other.

This is stupid for reasons many other people have listed. My suggestion is to just let close combat die altogether, it's stupid in a setting where things like D-cannons and titans exist anyway.

My issue was the inability to charge from vehicles and being shot off the board before it even matters... And they fixed the first, and t he second I hope will be fixed.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
My issue was the inability to charge from vehicles and being shot off the board before it even matters... And they fixed the first, and t he second I hope will be fixed.

Well other than Tyranids the 1st one will help a lot of armies out with #2 on your list

Tyranids I hope will just get fast movement for it's gribblies, a less awful Synapse, a better Shadow in the Warp.. Actually I can just stop here and say I hope everything improves and that I can finally see things that aren't Flyrants.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Tyranids I hope will just get fast movement for it's gribblies, a less awful Synapse, a better Shadow in the Warp.. Actually I can just stop here and say I hope everything improves and that I can finally see things that aren't Flyrants.

I agree on pretty much every one of those, I love my Tyranids but they need so much help, I am really hoping they will be good next edition.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Tyranids I hope will just get fast movement for it's gribblies, a less awful Synapse, a better Shadow in the Warp.. Actually I can just stop here and say I hope everything improves and that I can finally see things that aren't Flyrants.

Me too! I hate the things!