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.

Seriously? Of course no pre-measuring works. And as Mr Morden stated, so does pre-measuring. To say otherwise is disingenuous at best.
Saying that it hurts new players may be argued but has little bearing on the veracity of the mechanic itself. Does a new chess player have a disadvantage because he doesn't have a great understanding of common openings? Sure. That doesn't mean chess sucks as a game.
No pre-measuring as an adjunct to the 'fog of war' is just as reasonable as random charges. Just because you have a preference hardly makes it a fact.

Premeasure just purely depends on the game..

Don't mind premeasure in 40k, but in a skirmish level game Like Necromunda or Shadowwar I feel that it isn't a good thing

 Marmatag wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Distance is abstract, making the objections to pre-measuring rather silly.

Yeah I mean in nth dimensional topological spaces, a distance metric is an abstract concept even if it is well defined. But in the case of 2 and 3 dimensional space, it is definitely not abstract. Or am I misunderstanding you? I mean I do agree with your conclusion.

Distances in tabletop are abstract. In DnD, a "turn" is about six seconds, making one minute ten turns; and one square is 5 feet by 5 feet. But this isn't DnD. In 40k, a "turn" is an abstract amount of time that is variable depending on the situation. And distance is the same. When an infantry squad moves six inches, that six inches does not translate in to a specific unit of measurement. When a flier moves twelve inches, that doesn't mean the flier is going twice as fast as the tank that's moving six alongside the infantry.

It's abstract. Distances in 40k tabletop are non-literal.

 amanita wrote:
Seriously? Of course no pre-measuring works. And as Mr Morden stated, so does pre-measuring. To say otherwise is disingenuous at best.
Saying that it hurts new players may be argued but has little bearing on the veracity of the mechanic itself. Does a new chess player have a disadvantage because he doesn't have a great understanding of common openings? Sure. That doesn't mean chess sucks as a game.
No pre-measuring as an adjunct to the 'fog of war' is just as reasonable as random charges. Just because you have a preference hardly makes it a fact.

It is one of those "works in theory not in practice" sort of ways. I mean, sure, you don't know that that is 6", but you measured 6" distances a thousand times, so you know that is a 6" distance.

It is more of a barrier to play, which isn't the intention of the mechanic (i.e. to obfuscate information). After several games it stops doing that and merely acts as a speed bump for new players to overcome (and one that some folks with vision issues can't overcome).

In X-Wing, the game basically expects you to eventually learn where all the maneuvers put you. It isn't really using the templates to hide information, it is using them as a minimum skill barrier. Because the real game isn't figuring out where you'll end up, but trying to guess your opponent's moves (because movement is the actual hidden information).

The same goes with guessing movement distance and the like in inches. While it may be intended for it to hide the info, eventually it loses effectiveness and stops doing that. This is why it doesn't work, unless your intention is to design a mechanic that punishes the inexperience of new players (because it definitely does that!).

And let's not pretend that being able to guess a distance in your head is on par with learning opening moves and end states in chess. One is entirely reliant on visual accuity instead of any actual skill with the game. But then, chess is an abstract strategy game and not a war game, so trying to make some kind of argument of equivalence between the two is kind of daft in the first place.

Hinging your uncertainty and fog of war mechanic on something that many folks can trivially see through is bad design work. Disallowing pre-measuring doesn't do what it is intended to do and gets less effective at doing it as players gain more experience and it is a skill that is entirely orthogonal to how good a commander one is.

As you readily admit, the biggest flaw to no pre-measuring is that it punishes new players. Then you say after several games it stops being a barrier to play and is only a hindrance to those with vision issues. So let the players with genuine vision issues pre-measure?

If people become so good at gauging distances after a few games according to you - then why waste the time measuring? And I merely mentioned chess as an example so I apologize if I implied there was a direct correlation to learning opening moves to gauging increments on a table. However, this game is obviously an abstraction as well though it attempts in some way to simulate space fantasy combat.

One can just as easily argue that pre-measuring all movement and ranges to targets bogs down a game supposedly representing mere moments of action, thus ruining the immersion of a conflict where snap decisions decide the fate of one side or the other.

I'd say it's an apple to oranges comparison. Not just apples, as you say.

I like modifiers that disallow pre-measuring, for example, night fighting disallowing pre-measuring. But an entire game would just punish noobs and makes the game seem pretty frustrating to me at least.

 amanita wrote:
As you readily admit, the biggest flaw to no pre-measuring is that it punishes new players. Then you say after several games it stops being a barrier to play and is only a hindrance to those with vision issues. So let the players with genuine vision issues pre-measure?

If people become so good at gauging distances after a few games according to you - then why waste the time measuring? And I merely mentioned chess as an example so I apologize if I implied there was a direct correlation to learning opening moves to gauging increments on a table. However, this game is obviously an abstraction as well though it attempts in some way to simulate space fantasy combat.

One can just as easily argue that pre-measuring all movement and ranges to targets bogs down a game supposedly representing mere moments of action, thus ruining the immersion of a conflict where snap decisions decide the fate of one side or the other.

I'd say it's an apple to oranges comparison. Not just apples, as you say.

Basically no-premeasuring becomes 'memorize how long your hand is and use that'. In practice it bogs down the game in the exact same way you just have to pretend like you're checking for chipping or some gak instead of measuring distance by whatever thing you figured out to get around an arbitrary stupid system.

When the single most defining characteristic of a system is the methods of bypassing it, it's not a good system.

ERJAK wrote:

 amanita wrote:
As you readily admit, the biggest flaw to no pre-measuring is that it punishes new players. Then you say after several games it stops being a barrier to play and is only a hindrance to those with vision issues. So let the players with genuine vision issues pre-measure?

If people become so good at gauging distances after a few games according to you - then why waste the time measuring? And I merely mentioned chess as an example so I apologize if I implied there was a direct correlation to learning opening moves to gauging increments on a table. However, this game is obviously an abstraction as well though it attempts in some way to simulate space fantasy combat.

One can just as easily argue that pre-measuring all movement and ranges to targets bogs down a game supposedly representing mere moments of action, thus ruining the immersion of a conflict where snap decisions decide the fate of one side or the other.

I'd say it's an apple to oranges comparison. Not just apples, as you say.

Basically no-premeasuring becomes 'memorize how long your hand is and use that'. In practice it bogs down the game in the exact same way you just have to pretend like you're checking for chipping or some gak instead of measuring distance by whatever thing you figured out to get around an arbitrary stupid system.

When the single most defining characteristic of a system is the methods of bypassing it, it's not a good system.

Again, however, the problem is not the method, but the people who misuse/abuse it/other players.

Besides, and again, there is always that millimeter difference that can ruin even the most practiced estimation and fail a charge.

And also again, there is the fact that - in the forthcoming iteration of rules at least - player 2 can move a unit an uncertain distance from player 1s unit, thereby corrupting prior estimations based on nearby measurements, introducing the uncertainty to which I point in the first "again", above...

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Distance is abstract, making the objections to pre-measuring rather silly.

Yeah I mean in nth dimensional topological spaces, a distance metric is an abstract concept even if it is well defined. But in the case of 2 and 3 dimensional space, it is definitely not abstract. Or am I misunderstanding you? I mean I do agree with your conclusion.

Distances in tabletop are abstract. In DnD, a "turn" is about six seconds, making one minute ten turns; and one square is 5 feet by 5 feet. But this isn't DnD. In 40k, a "turn" is an abstract amount of time that is variable depending on the situation. And distance is the same. When an infantry squad moves six inches, that six inches does not translate in to a specific unit of measurement. When a flier moves twelve inches, that doesn't mean the flier is going twice as fast as the tank that's moving six alongside the infantry.

It's abstract. Distances in 40k tabletop are non-literal.

I understand where you're coming from now.

Speaking from the perspective of "I am watching a battle unfold before me," I agree with you.

From a game-management perspective as a person sitting down to play a fun game of Warhammer 40,000, though, distance is literal - "My plastic tank is exactly 12" away from your plastic soldier" - both players can immediately agree to this because it isn't abstract.

I can't do it do to my eyes, and plenty of times in other games I've had arguments of distance due to not pre-measuring, so no. I can understand simple stuff that is barely much of anything, but for the most part, I cannot function playing these games by not pre-measuring, in my head or otherwise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 amanita wrote:
Seriously? Of course no pre-measuring works. And as Mr Morden stated, so does pre-measuring. To say otherwise is disingenuous at best.
Saying that it hurts new players may be argued but has little bearing on the veracity of the mechanic itself. Does a new chess player have a disadvantage because he doesn't have a great understanding of common openings? Sure. That doesn't mean chess sucks as a game.
No pre-measuring as an adjunct to the 'fog of war' is just as reasonable as random charges. Just because you have a preference hardly makes it a fact.

Also that is a terrible analogy.

No premeasuring: punishes new players, punishes people with poor depth perception and spatial ability, and was one of the biggest causes of fights that I had to deal with for many many years.

No premeasure - no thanks.

Clarification: I can guess across a 6' gaming table to within an inch every time because we had to for the older games and we practiced it over and over and over again. I don't see that as anything more than a gimmick.

Think of this: of all the things that you would want to change about 40K, is the ability to pre-measure distances one of them?

Guessing and disallowing premeasurement are arcaic and obsolete mechanics, and a skill utterly out of tactics, strategy and wargaming.

If someone has very poor eyesight or distance-guessing skills, it shouldn't affect the performance at wargaming....

I like 40k better with premeasuring than I did without.

Premeasuring makes perfect sense to me in a game like 40k, both from a background and rules perspective.

In older editions that didnt allow it, about the only thing it prevented was some of the more gimmicky micromovement shennanigans and the odd very long range shot. The "skill" didnt really add anything "tactical" or fun, and really wasnt a test of command ability, and was mostly circumvented by people measurng anyway by other methods (e.g. hand length).


Premeasuring was a good change, no reason to revert that

Premeasuring only. I played Warmachine with no pre-measuring. It sucked

I'm all for pre-measuring.

It's not really relevant 90% of the time, I know my Leman Russ tank is in range, since my gun range is as long as the board. I know when you're in or out of range of the Exorcist, because most of the board is in range, and only that back sliver is out.

That's before we observe that the board is divided into convenient 2' tiles, which just so happens to correlate to the increments our guns are range in, making it doubly convenient to guess.

Then, there's the <10% of the time pre-measuring matters, and they'll either bog the game down in argument or are easily circumvented.

For shooting, you can just have a spotter unit fire first, to let you measure from the spotter to the target [or a target nearby, to gauge the range for your artillery. I can imagine a PCS sitting next to a Basilisk declaring shooting attacks against targets they can't hit.
For charging, well, you shot at them earlier, so how far away were they then?



In Dropzone Commander, you're allowed to pre-measure for all attacks except Reaction Fire [you don't have time to think about range when trying to shoot down a supersonic attack plane]. You are strictly not allowed to measure range for Reaction Fire until the attack has been declared and must be resolved. You pick a point along the movement corridor where you want to shoot down the enemy plane, then measure the range from your FlaK gun to that point, and if it's in range, you resolve your shooting. But 90% of the time, the plane flew so close to the FlaK guns that you don't even need to measure or flew by a building or unit that was shot earlier in the turn by something else, or you measured for the FlaK gun's range when you activated them earlier but didn't shoot with them to make sure that the enemy would have to fly through their range, so the whole "no pre-measuring" rule rarely takes effect and we don't really care.