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.

Here it is:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/05/02/new-warhammer-40000-fight-phase-may2gw-homepage-post-4/

Across the board, these changes lead to combats that are more deadly than ever. Generals who successfully coordinate a battlefield-wide charge will be rewarded with a phase of utter carnage, while their opponent will have to work hard to minimise taking damage, and carefully consider their retaliatory options.

I like that some CC took way to long.

Units that activate gain a free 3″ move towards the closest enemy. This can be used to get within 1″ of other enemy units, if you’re cunning, dragging more foes into the melee and preventing them from shooting next turn, even if you didn’t charge them directly (giving them no chance to overwatch). Enemy gun lines will need to be careful about how they position their supporting units, so as to avoid getting dragged into the fight too.

This makes a lot of sense fluff wise. Now you have to keep you units more than 4" away from CC if you don’t want them to get dragged in to it. So no more situations where you are 1" away from a CC and don’t care about it. "There is a Gene Stealer fighting with a Space marine 2 meters away from me but i don’t care what could go wrong"


And lot of stuff got carried over from AoS. I am not sure if i like the activation mechanic. But it gives more room for tactical decisions. And lash whips are gonna be useful again.

Great, IGOUGO system....i cant wait.

Plays just like AoS with the exception of Charges going first. So combat will look like:

Player A's Charging Units
Players B's unit
Player A's unit if already engaged

I love this, amazing!.
Also love the part that you can engage other units currently not in CC if they are within one inch, and they don't get over watch!

BomBomHotdog wrote:
Plays just like AoS with the exception of Charges going first. So combat will look like:

Player A's Charging Units
Players B's unit
Player A's unit if already engaged

Not quite, you assuming that charging units attacking counts as player A going first. Its only said charging units go first before other units So there is a good chance it means

Charging units strike first
Decide who gets to activate first
Player A gets to attack first.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Great, IGOUGO system....i cant wait.

IGOUGO systems can work out pretty well. I thought Dust Warfare did a pretty good job with it adding a Command Phase that gave players the option to get in half actions with some of their units before the turn started off proper. Along with Warfare's reaction system, it kept the inactive player invested in the active player's turn. However, I don't think 8th edition is going to have anything like that. It is probably going to be more of the same.

So consolidations into new combats is back in a slightly changed manner...on paper that sounds like it'll kill any idea of running an IG infantry based army viably, there just isn't enough tablespace for such armies to fit and have adequate spacing. We'll see if I'm wrong, but the ability to move about and lock new units in combat in such a "gimmicky" way really feels open to abuse, just the way consolidating into new combats was in 3rd and 4th.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Great, IGOUGO system....i cant wait.

IGOUGO systems can work out pretty well. I thought Dust Warfare did a pretty good job with it adding a Command Phase that gave players the option to get in half actions with some of their units before the turn started off proper. Along with Warfare's reaction system, it kept the inactive player invested in the active player's turn. However, I don't think 8th edition is going to have anything like that. It is probably going to be more of the same.

The all combat at once system kept player interaction because everyone was fighting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
So consolidations into new combats is back in a slightly changed manner...on paper that sounds like it'll kill any idea of running an IG infantry based army viably, there just isn't enough tablespace for such armies to fit and have adequate spacing. We'll see if I'm wrong, but the ability to move about and lock new units in combat in such a "gimmicky" way really feels open to abuse, just the way consolidating into new combats was in 3rd and 4th.

Oh crap i forgot about consolidating into combat lol, guess thats back again boys.

Looks good and I'm pretty positive on it.

One side effect that seems likely though is combat will be get less exciting as the phase goes on.

Player A's chargers attack
Player B now chooses a unit to fit and probably picks their most elite unit so it'll get it's swings in.
Player A probably follows the same logic.

So you'll likely start off with the epic fight between the Deathwing Knights and the Bloodthirster at the start of the phase, and then escalate to the Scouts fighting Flesh Hounds after. It seems opposite of how you'd want to structure the narrative.

Seems Slaaneshi units will do quite well in causing problems outside of their turn. Now maybe Lucius will finally have a purpose!

I hope all Harlequins have a "these guy strike first" rule. Outside of Initiative 7 or higher enemies, which are extremely few and far between, they always strike first.

 Asmodai wrote:
Looks good and I'm pretty positive on it.

One side effect that seems likely though is combat will be get less exciting as the phase goes on.

Player A's chargers attack
Player B now chooses a unit to fit and probably picks their most elite unit so it'll get it's swings in.
Player A probably follows the same logic.

So you'll likely start off with the epic fight between the Deathwing Knights and the Bloodthirster at the start of the phase, and then escalate to the Scouts fighting Flesh Hounds after. It seems opposite of how you'd want to structure the narrative.

Actually it might look quite a bit different than that.

It will likely look more like

DA player activates DW knights to attack the bloodthirster.
Daemon Player activates Fleshounds to attack scouts (because the thirster is either dead, or in no danger because the Knights have already attacked)
DA player activates scouts (if any live)
Daemon Player activates thirster.

essentially you will almost always activate units that have not been attacked yet, unless multiple units are attacking a single unit of your own. You will also likely look to activate your less durable units first. So you might decide that your DW knights will weather the Blood thirster attacks reasonably well, so you attack with your scouts first, believing that they may be wiped out should you not. Very tactical I like it.

Welp. so much for playing my Krieg list again and having fun with it.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Great, IGOUGO system....i cant wait.

Dude, that's alternating activations 100%, if you're going to whine about game mechanics then at least know what those mechanics are.

Side: The previous melee system was 'compare stat sheets in excel to see who's is higher overall and once you recover from your boredom coma whoever had a lower number removes his models.'

I like how you can use the 3 inch pile-in to catch someone in close combat. That's very useful! The alternating activations seem cool too - very cinematic.

I read the part about activation and don't understand.

So you charge, and the squads that charged get to attack first. Afterwards, each side picks a unit one at a time to resolve combats? Is that how it works?

The part about being within 1 inch - does that mean you get to attack other units during combat?

These rules seem pretty good! I like the 3" move after making a charge, that plus the 1" to reach combat seems like it will not allow for much advantage or possible gaming of the system by 'weaving' units inbetween each other that could otherwise happen.

 Asmodai wrote:
So you'll likely start off with the epic fight between the Deathwing Knights and the Bloodthirster at the start of the phase, and then escalate to the Scouts fighting Flesh Hounds after. It seems opposite of how you'd want to structure the narrative.

In AoS it doesn't always work out this way. There are times where you would be better off having a "lower tier" unit go before your more elite units simply because they are fresher and have less casualties. You can also bet on which unit your opponent chooses to activate and hold off, bit of a gamble though.

I'm more interested how the verticality works. If I have 2 different units using a set of ruins, one of the bottom floor and one on the next floor, about 3" up, is the unit on the top floor engaged? What if it's a larger model like a walker or MC? Do we draw from the base or the model? If its bases then obviously they are not, but if its model-to-model then things get a bit....yeah

I'm about an edition behind, so I apologize if this is a known thing: Does unit activation happen simultaneously--for instance, like if 2 Initiative 5 units fought in previous editions--or does it happen sequentially.

Meaning, if you activate a unit and it kills 3 models, are those models removed from play or do they get a chance to strike? And if no chance, I sure hope the defender gets to pick the models that are pulled.

Initiative is gone, orangewhips, it is removed from 8th edition statlines. In this, it is done by activation, so if you activate one unit and they weaken an enemy before it activates, it's exactly that.

That said, it works well as a tactical layer in AoS, because you can direct the flow of a battle very well and fight with who you most want to before they are hit back.

I suppose that means powerfusts and hammers are going to be the new power unit.

Quite possibly. Though who knows where the rules will fall with regards to them.

 Vaktathi wrote:
So consolidations into new combats is back in a slightly changed manner...on paper that sounds like it'll kill any idea of running an IG infantry based army viably, there just isn't enough tablespace for such armies to fit and have adequate spacing. We'll see if I'm wrong, but the ability to move about and lock new units in combat in such a "gimmicky" way really feels open to abuse, just the way consolidating into new combats was in 3rd and 4th.

Abuse is a possibility but remember that I think we are also getting the ability to withdraw from combat in good order so gunline armies are certainly not DoA.

I just want a system where it feels like any style of army is equally viable if played well. 40K has always been vulnerable to rock-paper-scissors syndrome where certain match-ups favour one opponent over the other from the outset. With CC being easier to achieve but also easier to leave, my hope is that some balance can be restored here. It remains to be seen if this is the case in practice or if it will just create a new set of imbalances.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Welp. so much for playing my Krieg list again and having fun with it.

Yeah, mechanized IG may be functional, but infantry based IG armies are simply going to be way too vulnerable to that gimmicky 4" CC pile in bubble to be viable methinks.

Perhaps, though also remember that the fixed rolls will be helping masses of IG just punch stuff to death as well. And as someone else mentioned, there is withdrawing out of combat.

 Karhedron wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
So consolidations into new combats is back in a slightly changed manner...on paper that sounds like it'll kill any idea of running an IG infantry based army viably, there just isn't enough tablespace for such armies to fit and have adequate spacing. We'll see if I'm wrong, but the ability to move about and lock new units in combat in such a "gimmicky" way really feels open to abuse, just the way consolidating into new combats was in 3rd and 4th.

Abuse is a possibility but remember that I think we are also getting the ability to withdraw from combat in good order so gunline armies are certainly not DoA.

I just want a system where it feels like any style of army is equally viable if played well. 40K has always been vulnerable to rock-paper-scissors syndrome where certain match-ups favour one opponent over the other from the outset. With CC being easier to achieve but also easier to leave, my hope is that some balance can be restored here. It remains to be seen if this is the case in practice or if it will just create a new set of imbalances.

I think thats what everyone wants. Part of the problem is that there are too many armies operating over too large a scale range trying to portray forces of radically different natures, many that would not face each other in the manner a 40k battle portrays (e.g. Dark Eldar would never face an IG tank company in a pitched frontal firefight the way a 40k battle would start). Part of the problem, at least in this instance, is also simply board space, there isnt enough room for an IG infantry army to properly deploy and spread out, and moving out of CC, even if allowed, can likewise be difficult if there is no room to actually move to.

Did they suggest there'd be a movespeed increase when charging? Or do you just move within 3" during the movement phase, and then pile in the fight phase?

As, they notably said Overwatch still exists, so that can clear up speculation on whether that still exists.

Not sure how I feel about the alternating activation element of combat. Doesn't that kinda penalise armies that will be engaging with multiple units? If you're just running a deathstar and no other melee units, you'll likely be able to maximise your damage within a phase. If you have many small units, your opponent can choose to fight those which haven't activated yet to limit their effectiveness. Not sure how I feel about that, but this definitely has the potential to be interesting.

Breng77 wrote:

essentially you will almost always activate units that have not been attacked yet, unless multiple units are attacking a single unit of your own. You will also likely look to activate your less durable units first. So you might decide that your DW knights will weather the Blood thirster attacks reasonably well, so you attack with your scouts first, believing that they may be wiped out should you not. Very tactical I like it.

That's not exactly correct, your goal should always be to maximize your attacks while minimizing your opponents. With that in mind, you will almost always want to attack units that have not gone yet in order to reduce their attacks against you. Your secondary concern is using your most effective units early in the phase to minimize the effect of casualties. Finally, being able to figure out your opponent's order of activation in advance will let you take risky moves (violations to the first two rules) to gain an advantage. Alternating activations is the part haters miss when they say AoS has no tactical depth, It's absolutely more tactical than any equivalent system in in 40k. I'm happy to see it making the jump to 40k.

BomBomHotdog wrote:
Plays just like AoS with the exception of Charges going first. So combat will look like:

Player A's Charging Units
Players B's unit
Player A's unit if already engaged

What of multiple units charging different targets do they all get to go first before the igyg?

If I had to guess, it would break down like this:

All charging units attack
Controlling player chooses first unit that has not charged to attack
Second player chooses

And so on until all units are activated.