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.

Earth127 wrote:
In fact alternating activiation would favour huge deathstars.

This is a popular myth about alternating activation systems, but it isn't true. If you actually play games with alternating activation you'll find that yes, large death star type units have an advantage in getting to activate a lot of power at once and seize a key opportunity, but they also have some massive drawbacks. There's a lot of power in the ability to activate "extra" units, whether in the form of expendable cannon fodder, units located away from the most important fight, etc, and delay committing to an action until your opponent has committed to their own. A MSU army will activate less power at once, but it will have the ability to run circles around that single death star. For example, you start the game with everything hidden behind cover. You activate your cannon fodder, your opponent is forced to activate their death star early because they have nothing else and can only throw it at your cannon fodder. Now you activate your real units, move to ideal positions, and deliver a crippling blow while your opponent has to sit there and watch.

Unless you say the opponents army has to entirely go before a unit activates again. At that point it's backll to IGOUGO.

Except it isn't, because when you finish up your units all at once it's usually going to be a handful of activations made at the end of an interesting sequence. You're rarely sitting there for 30 minutes watching helplessly as your opponent does whatever they want, and if you are it's because you over-invested in a single death star instead of taking a more balanced force. Most of the time it's a lot more interactive and interesting than IGOUGO.

What I really want to see used more is larger tables for any game above 1500 points. depending on deployment type on a 6x4 table It can be impossible to be far away from your opponent altogether.

The problem is that large tables are not practical. A 6x4 table is about the limit of what you can comfortably reach across, any larger and it's just too hard to move models/measure distances/etc. And a 6x4 table is also at the limit of what most people have available, designing the game around an assumption of a larger table means that the vast majority of games won't be played as intended.

I must admit I don't have experience with wargames outside of W40K, my other tabletop gaming experience is mostly coop/DnD where the line is a lot blurier.

I think that's where the golden zone is tough more flexible rules. Keep IGOUGO base structure but provide more rules and meaningfull interaction for the opponent( key reason I like Strength from death even if it broke 7th 40k due to being alone).

Earth127 wrote:
I must admit I don't have experience with wargames outside of W40K, my other tabletop gaming experience is mostly coop/DnD where the line is a lot blurier.

I think that's where the golden zone is tough more flexible rules. Keep IGOUGO base structure but provide more rules and meaningfull interaction for the opponent( key reason I like Strength from death even if it broke 7th 40k due to being alone).

It sounds like you want alternating activations here.

Earth127 wrote:
It means that using the shiny new hype isn't inherently superior too old stuff.

Limiting alpha strike potential is a problem in 40k design but it isn't solved by alternating activation. In fact alternating activiation would favour huge deathstars. Unless you say the opponents army has to entirely go before a unit activates again.

I have never seen anyone suggest a system for alternating unit activation that allowed the same unit to be activated over and over again.You alternate until everyone has gone. There are no deathstar activations because deathstars require multiple units working in tandum. With each unit activating alone it's damage output is limited to what one unit can do.

At that point it's backll to IGOUGO.

Wut?

What I really want to see used more is larger tables for any game above 1500 points. depending on deployment type on a 6x4 table It can be impossible to be far away from your opponent altogether.

There is also LoS blocking terrain. Anyone that tells you it isn't an effective alpha strike mitigater hasn't tried it.
barrage-like weapons are few and far between.

So you want bigger than 6x4 at 1500+?

So... favor the tau and hurt the ork?

 Lance845 wrote:

Earth127 wrote:
It means that using the shiny new hype isn't inherently superior too old stuff.

Limiting alpha strike potential is a problem in 40k design but it isn't solved by alternating activation. In fact alternating activiation would favour huge deathstars. Unless you say the opponents army has to entirely go before a unit activates again.

I have never seen anyone suggest a system for alternating unit activation that allowed the same unit to be activated over and over again.You alternate until everyone has gone. There are no deathstar activations because deathstars require multiple units working in tandum. With each unit activating alone it's damage output is limited to what one unit can do.

Infinity makes it so you can activate one unit as many times as you want but most folks that actually play it don't see an issue.

Who needs death stars? Magnus and 3 Knights. You finish your turn in 4 activations, having shot 2000 points worth of death while your enemy is still busy finishing off the rest of his turn to catch up to the buttkicking he just received.

Fewer models activate quicker and frontload their payload just like a 1st turn barrage. Only now you're suffering that 1st turn barrage EVERY TURN. Should have just kept the single turn advantage instead of giving your enemy's Titan the advantage constantly.

Speaking of Titans, I play a single Lord of War. That's my army. The game is back to IGOUGO.

Alternating activations are inherently in favor of more elite armies. That's WHY we have IGOUGO..... give the Orks a chance! They want to frontload all their spammy death sometimes too!

If that truly is a problem, and it never has been in alternating activations games I've played, then either a) you don't play that person or b) you take the Bolt Action route and make it random alternating activations with a dice bag.

 Arkaine wrote:
Who needs death stars? Magnus and 3 Knights. You finish your turn in 4 activations, having shot 2000 points worth of death while your enemy is still busy finishing off the rest of his turn to catch up to the buttkicking he just received.

Fewer models activate quicker and frontload their payload just like a 1st turn barrage. Only now you're suffering that 1st turn barrage EVERY TURN. Should have just kept the single turn advantage instead of giving your enemy's Titan the advantage constantly.

Speaking of Titans, I play a single Lord of War. That's my army. The game is back to IGOUGO.

Alternating activations are inherently in favor of more elite armies. That's WHY we have IGOUGO..... give the Orks a chance! They want to frontload all their spammy death sometimes too!

Again, if you actually play games with alternating activations it doesn't work like that. Putting your entire army in a single activation means you get outmaneuvered and exploited because you have zero ability to stall and wait for your opponent to commit before committing your own forces. In games like this there's a ton of pressure to make sure that you have enough activations, often to the point that people include cheap MSU units for the sole purpose of gaining additional activations.

 Arkaine wrote:
Who needs death stars? Magnus and 3 Knights. You finish your turn in 4 activations, having shot 2000 points worth of death while your enemy is still busy finishing off the rest of his turn to catch up to the buttkicking he just received.

There are advantages and disadvantages to having larger more powerful units with less activations and smaller less powerful units with more activations. The smaller units will have greater over all mobility. In that yes, your 4 guys will activate and each activation will have a big impact and what little they can see and interact with, while the more activations guy can strategize around that. Feed those power houses targets while getting other units ready to come out and strike after they have already acted and can no longer react to anything you are doing.

To throw in another counter point, lets pretend the rest of what I said doesn't exist, what the hell is the difference between alternating unit activation and IGOUGO with that happening RIGHT NOW?

Someone with a dozen units vs magnus and 3 knights. Magnus and 3 knights have less deployments so chances are they go first. Except now instead of one acting and then you getting to respond all 4 get to act at once and lay down their 2k points of death before you get to move, or shoot, or buff, or anything. The situation you propose is WORSE with IGOUGO.

Fewer models activate quicker and frontload their payload just like a 1st turn barrage. Only now you're suffering that 1st turn barrage EVERY TURN. Should have just kept the single turn advantage instead of giving your enemy's Titan the advantage constantly.

Again. This is what is happening now. EVERY TURN. Except in the other version you get to act in between activations. Are are you thinking that turns don't exist? Depending on the system used if player 1 has 4 activations and player 2 has 12 then a single turn would go 1212121222222222 or it would have tokens for each unit thrown into a dice bag and the pwerson with less activations would be less likely to get a activation drawn from the bag. Or any number of other systems. These an panicy responses that are not thinking the systems through. There is no issue you can invent for alternating activations and "deathstars" that isn't compounded and made worse by IGOUGO.

Speaking of Titans, I play a single Lord of War. That's my army. The game is back to IGOUGO.

Sure. Maybe? Again, the system may have you acting randomly in the middle of the other players turn.

Alternating activations are inherently in favor of more elite armies. That's WHY we have IGOUGO..... give the Orks a chance! They want to frontload all their spammy death sometimes too!

No they are not. They are in direct favor of neither. They actual favor the most an army with a nice mix of heavy hitters and smaller more mobile units. You need to keep on your feet but drop the hammer where it needs to be dropped. Again, these are nonsensical panicy complaints that don't hold up under any actual scrutiny.

 Lance845 wrote:
Someone with a dozen units vs magnus and 3 knights. Magnus and 3 knights have less deployments so chances are they go first. Except now instead of one acting and then you getting to respond all 4 get to act at once and lay down their 2k points of death before you get to move, or shoot, or buff, or anything. The situation you propose is WORSE with IGOUGO.

Again. This is what is happening now. EVERY TURN. Except in the other version you get to act in between activations. Are are you thinking that turns don't exist? Depending on the system used if player 1 has 4 activations and player 2 has 12 then a single turn would go 1212121222222222 or it would have tokens for each unit thrown into a dice bag and the pwerson with less activations would be less likely to get a activation drawn from the bag. Or any number of other systems. These an panicy responses that are not thinking the systems through. There is no issue you can invent for alternating activations and "deathstars" that isn't compounded and made worse by IGOUGO.

No, it's not what we have now. This is why I feel you are NOT thinking through the steps. Despite your ridicule, it's actually your stance that isn't holding up to scrutiny. You are failing to look past the 1st turn which is why I know you have never even tried to play Warhammer 40k as an alternating activation game. If you had, these obvious flaws would have stood out to you in your theorycrafting.

In an IGOUGO system, allowing four giant monsters to go first and then responding means they shoot 2000 pts at you, you shoot 2000 pts at them, they shoot whatever's left at you, etc.
In an alternating system, the four monsters will shoot their 2000 pts before you do EVERY SINGLE TURN, which makes similar to an IGOUGO except the monsters have the advantage every single time.

Alternating elite armies don't need to roll for who goes first. They always "go first" and they will always finish their activations before you get your full turn. In your 12121212222222222 example, the enemy ALWAYS shoots before half your army, every single game turn. Your proposed system makes elite armies have the inherent advantage of Initiative, acting faster than your army can regardless of who began activating the first unit. Did you win the roll to go first or seize? That's nice, I'm still going to drop 2000 pts of death before you do much of anything. It doesn't matter if an elite army loses the first turn roll, they'll activate more quickly than you do and effectively get their turn in before you do anyway. If I bring a single Titan as my list, regardless of who went first or second, I will shoot ALL 2000 points of my army before you activate a second unit. This is horrible for horde armies and only benefits strong elite armies.

Since I bet you still can't see how it's different to what we have now, let's shift back to IGOUGO. Horde armies like Orks now have a slim chance through rolls to actually shoot all 2000 pts of their list before your elite titan list even moves at all, the titans get to retaliate yet look at the difference in activation speed for that turn! Then they get another opportunity to do it on turn 2, again before your Titans stomp them in. Once again, you have an activation speed advantage because most of your units aren't always going last on every single turn.

Since you guys love to bring up other game systems, lets take a look at Infinity for sure! I can bring a single heavy beast of an Avatar, my entire list let's say, and you have similarly point troops. With alternating activations, I can pump my entire army's strength into every single activation until I run out of orders. I'm going to be outshooting you easily because you can't catch up to my damage per activation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:
To throw in another counter point, lets pretend the rest of what I said doesn't exist, what the hell is the difference between alternating unit activation and IGOUGO with that happening RIGHT NOW?

The difference is that right now Hordes are permitted to act without a handicap in speed. They can exercise their full turn before you even get yours, whereas in alternating activations an elite army will always exercise their full turn before your entire army gets to go. You are ALWAYS stuck playing last in an activation switchoff if you have more units. Can you use that to tactically plan or run circles around the opposition? Sure. You can do the exact same thing in an IGOUGO system, only better since your buffing Chaos Lord, Sorcerer, and Khorne Berserkers move at the SAME TIME.

The difference between existing 40k and your version of 40k is that currently horde armies have a chance to go before elite armies if they roll well. But in your alternating version of 40k, the elite armies always finish up their turn before you do. Or to put it another way... your version of 40k is like telling all elite armies that they have the Always Goes First player special rule. Screw dice rolling for turns! Current 40k that only happens HALF the time, not 100% of the time like what you want to do.

Your Infinity example is wrong. You get activations equal to your unit count, you just get to allocate them as you like. Your hypothetical one unit list will get one activation per turn and then sit idle for the rest of the turn.

Also, Infinity is not alternating activations, it's IGOUGO with reactuons.

 Peregrine wrote:
Your Infinity example is wrong. You get activations equal to your unit count, you just get to allocate them as you like. Your hypothetical one unit list will get one activation per turn and then sit idle for the rest of the turn.

Also, Infinity is not alternating activations, it's IGOUGO with reactuons.

That's the whole bloody point... that Infinity as an alternating activation system would be insane. Thanks for keeping up with the crowd.

 Arkaine wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Someone with a dozen units vs magnus and 3 knights. Magnus and 3 knights have less deployments so chances are they go first. Except now instead of one acting and then you getting to respond all 4 get to act at once and lay down their 2k points of death before you get to move, or shoot, or buff, or anything. The situation you propose is WORSE with IGOUGO.

Again. This is what is happening now. EVERY TURN. Except in the other version you get to act in between activations. Are are you thinking that turns don't exist? Depending on the system used if player 1 has 4 activations and player 2 has 12 then a single turn would go 1212121222222222 or it would have tokens for each unit thrown into a dice bag and the pwerson with less activations would be less likely to get a activation drawn from the bag. Or any number of other systems. These an panicy responses that are not thinking the systems through. There is no issue you can invent for alternating activations and "deathstars" that isn't compounded and made worse by IGOUGO.

No, it's not what we have now. This is why I feel you are NOT thinking through the steps. Despite your ridicule, it's actually your stance that isn't holding up to scrutiny. You are failing to look past the 1st turn which is why I know you have never even tried to play Warhammer 40k as an alternating activation game. If you had, these obvious flaws would have stood out to you in your theorycrafting.

First:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/705473.page

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727676.page

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/649503.page

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/674042.page

And more. Also, Just an FYI. My Bachelors Degree from the University of Advancing Technology is in Game Design.

Not only have I been participating in discussion on these mechanics I have been testing them FOR YEARS with a degree based on the building, testing, and refining of game mechanics. It's not simply theory crafting. I have implemented it myself. Tested it myself. Refined it myself.

In an IGOUGO system, allowing four giant monsters to go first and then responding means they shoot 2000 pts at you, you shoot 2000 pts at them, they shoot whatever's left at you, etc.
In an alternating system, the four monsters will shoot their 2000 pts before you do EVERY SINGLE TURN, which makes similar to an IGOUGO except the monsters have the advantage every single time.

In IGOUGO first player shoots 2k points. Second player shoots 2k-losses. In alternating activations first player shoots 1 units point value. Second player shoots 1 units points value (MAYBE minus losses if that is the unit they activate).

Alternating elite armies don't need to roll for who goes first. They always "go first" and they will always finish their activations before you get your full turn.

Who goes first is based on the mechanics of the system. Off of 8ths system? yes. The lower unit army would most likely go first. By Bolt Actions system? Very unlikely that they would go first or second or 3rd for that matter. But they could, It's basically random.

In your 12121212222222222 example, the enemy ALWAYS shoots before half your army, every single game turn. Your proposed system makes elite armies have the inherent advantage of Initiative, acting faster than your army can regardless of who began activating the first unit. Did you win the roll to go first or seize? That's nice, I'm still going to drop 2000 pts of death before you do much of anything. It doesn't matter if an elite army loses the first turn roll, they'll activate more quickly than you do and effectively get their turn in before you do anyway. If I bring a single Titan as my list, regardless of who went first or second, I will shoot ALL 2000 points of my army before you activate a second unit. This is horrible for horde armies and only benefits strong elite armies.

This is just false. What If my first activation is tying up one of your guys in melee? What if my guys are all scattered around at different ranges in los blocking terrain. You have to move your guys to get into a position to get a single unit in los. Or target the units I leave out to bait you with. Once your activations are spent my other more critical units can run rampant. I don't think YOU have ever played these types of games. YOUR theory crafting seems to be a lot of nonsense.

Since I bet you still can't see how it's different to what we have now, let's shift back to IGOUGO. Horde armies like Orks now have a slim chance through rolls to actually shoot all 2000 pts of their list before your elite titan list even moves at all, the titans get to retaliate yet look at the difference in activation speed for that turn! Then they get another opportunity to do it on turn 2, again before your Titans stomp them in. Once again, you have an activation speed advantage because most of your units aren't always going last on every single turn.

Witht he current system the orks have a slim chance to go full bore with 2k points. Otherwise it's 2k- loss. Then the titan attacks with 2k points. Then it's orks with 2k minus 2 rounds of losses.

]Since you guys love to bring up other game systems, lets take a look at Infinity for sure! I can bring a single heavy beast of an Avatar, my entire list let's say, and you have similarly point troops. With alternating activations, I can pump my entire army's strength into every single activation until I run out of orders. I'm going to be outshooting you easily because you can't catch up to my damage per activation.

I am less familiar with infinity then I am other systems. So I cannot comment overly much on inifinity. Except to say that it is my undertsanding that infinity is based on very small squads and it's rules probably don't and cannot encompass what 40k brings to the table. So... bad system for an example?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:
To throw in another counter point, lets pretend the rest of what I said doesn't exist, what the hell is the difference between alternating unit activation and IGOUGO with that happening RIGHT NOW?

The difference is that right now Hordes are permitted to act without a handicap in speed. They can exercise their full turn before you even get yours, whereas in alternating activations an elite army will always exercise their full turn before your entire army gets to go. You are ALWAYS stuck playing last in an activation switchoff if you have more units. Can you use that to tactically plan or run circles around the opposition? Sure. You can do the exact same thing in an IGOUGO system, only better since your buffing Chaos Lord, Sorcerer, and Khorne Berserkers move at the SAME TIME.

You don't seem to understand the advantage that the flexibility more activations offers brings to the table. There is a reason MSU is common in many game systems. It's powerful to be able to adjust and react. Your calling one of the biggest advantages and disadvantage. Madness.

 Peregrine wrote:
Your Infinity example is wrong. You get activations equal to your unit count, you just get to allocate them as you like. Your hypothetical one unit list will get one activation per turn and then sit idle for the rest of the turn.

Also, Infinity is not alternating activations, it's IGOUGO with reactuons.

As usual, you are so literal, that the point goes over your head... So one less extreme example - take one unit comprising 70% of your army strenght and three units comprising 10% each. You get four activations a turn and can use as much as 280% of nominal army strenght each turn...

 Lance845 wrote:
And more. Also, Just an FYI. My Bachelors Degree from the University of Advancing Technology is in Game Design.

Then we are both graduates of the same one building office in the middle of sweltering Arizona. Did they stick you in the apartments near the mall too or did you find your own local housing? You remember the mall, right? The GW store, the food court near the movie theater, the giant screens and stair seating... personally I liked the pool at the apartments they housed me at. Oh and Fry's Electronics... that place puts Best Buy to shame. Or heck, the nice carpeted interior with the kids near the cafeteria eternally playing Smash Brothers on that corner screen... across from which was the auditorium where I won the Star Fox 64 tournament by being the best aerial battler.

Please don't think you're the only person to have attended UAT or studied Game Design... class of 2007.

 Lance845 wrote:
This is just false. What If my first activation is tying up one of your guys in melee? What if my guys are all scattered around at different ranges in los blocking terrain. You have to move your guys to get into a position to get a single unit in los. Or target the units I leave out to bait you with. Once your activations are spent my other more critical units can run rampant. I don't think YOU have ever played these types of games. YOUR theory crafting seems to be a lot of nonsense.

You can already do such shenanigans in the current system, it's not false because you haven't contradicted any of my points nor claimed your own facts. If I have a SINGLE activation, I will eternally go before your 2nd activation regardless of what sort of system you come up to determine who goes first or second each turn. In that regard, it's identical to IGOUGO only -I always get first turn-.

Sheesh, you are oblivious to the end and eager to sound like you know anything about game design when UAT only stole our class homework and sold them to other companies. I came up with chicken scratch one morning because I didn't remember to do the assignment. That fat, bald, orange bearded Jedi-nerd of a teacher gave me a 95% for it.

Also, on a Titan example - if said Titan have some form of split fire rule for each of it's weapons, then it is effectively a number of simultanous activations. And indeed will go with full strengh before entire (or entire minus one unit) opposing army each turn, having huge advantage over any MSU army in non Maelstrom type of scenario.

From what I read from both Peregrine and Lance arguments, is that you both make some silent assumptions about relative strenghts and sizes of available units and scenarios played, based on systems, that do not have power discrepancies as huge as possible in 40K. It is entirely possible to play 40K-esue alternative activations game based on ~3rd ed set of units, but it is impossible to do so with 7th-8th ed set of units...

 mugginns wrote:

Earth127 wrote:
I must admit I don't have experience with wargames outside of W40K, my other tabletop gaming experience is mostly coop/DnD where the line is a lot blurier.

I think that's where the golden zone is tough more flexible rules. Keep IGOUGO base structure but provide more rules and meaningfull interaction for the opponent( key reason I like Strength from death even if it broke 7th 40k due to being alone).

It sounds like you want alternating activations here.

Not entirely. I want more armies capable of essentially using "trap card" esque abilities. like the reactions you can take in dnd. Universally they are limited to non-existent but if you so chosse you can build a crap ton of them.

But whatever system you choose it has to be well designed.

 Lance845 wrote:

You don't seem to understand the advantage that the flexibility more activations offers brings to the table. There is a reason MSU is common in many game systems. It's powerful to be able to adjust and react. Your calling one of the biggest advantages and disadvantage. Madness.

Wrong, MSU is great because of flexibility in unit choices, positioning, and loadout. You can easily have 20 plasma gunners or four teams of 5 plasma gunners in 40k as well. I'm not knocking that advantage anywhere because it doesn't pertain to the initiative aspect of alternating activations. It doesn't matter if you went MSU, your opponent has fewer activations and so will be finishing before you do. You can try to make use of your MSU advantage... but you can do the same thing in 40k!!! Just without always giving your opponent the rights to first turn every turn.

nou wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Your Infinity example is wrong. You get activations equal to your unit count, you just get to allocate them as you like. Your hypothetical one unit list will get one activation per turn and then sit idle for the rest of the turn.

Also, Infinity is not alternating activations, it's IGOUGO with reactuons.

As usual, you are so literal, that the point goes over your head... So one less extreme example - take one unit comprising 70% of your army strenght and three units comprising 10% each. You get four activations a turn and can use as much as 280% of nominal army strenght each turn...

I dont think anyone would want alternating activations for 40k where you could activate the same unit multiple times, so why go you keep talking about it?

GW already did a game with alternating activations back in what, 1998? Epic Armageddon was fine.

 Arkaine wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
And more. Also, Just an FYI. My Bachelors Degree from the University of Advancing Technology is in Game Design.

Then we are both graduates of the same one building office in the middle of sweltering Arizona. Did they stick you in the apartments near the mall too or did you find your own local housing? You remember the mall, right? The GW store, the food court near the movie theater, the giant screens and stair seating... personally I liked the pool at the apartments they housed me at. Oh and Fry's Electronics... that place puts Best Buy to shame. Or heck, the nice carpeted interior with the kids near the cafeteria eternally playing Smash Brothers on that corner screen... across from which was the auditorium where I won the Star Fox 64 tournament by being the best aerial battler.

Please don't think you're the only person to have attended UAT or studied Game Design... class of 2007.

I don't think I am. I am simply pointing out that your assertions that I am just some butt hole sitting around having never played these systems is false. Test the game systems. I tweak them. I make new ones. My "fan 8th" project was abandon only because actual 8th was shaping up to do a lot of what I was trying to do anyway. No reason to reinvent the wheel.

 Lance845 wrote:
This is just false. What If my first activation is tying up one of your guys in melee? What if my guys are all scattered around at different ranges in los blocking terrain. You have to move your guys to get into a position to get a single unit in los. Or target the units I leave out to bait you with. Once your activations are spent my other more critical units can run rampant. I don't think YOU have ever played these types of games. YOUR theory crafting seems to be a lot of nonsense.

You can already do such shenanigans in the current system, it's not false because you haven't contradicted any of my points nor claimed your own facts. If I have a SINGLE activation, I will eternally go before your 2nd activation regardless of what sort of system you come up to determine who goes first or second each turn. In that regard, it's identical to IGOUGO only -I always get first turn-.

Sheesh, you are oblivious to the end and eager to sound like you know anything about game design when UAT only stole our class homework and sold them to other companies. I came up with chicken scratch one morning because I didn't remember to do the assignment. That fat, bald, orange bearded Jedi-nerd of a teacher gave me a 95% for it.

School in general is a joke in the USA. But Game Design as a cohesive study is in it's infancy. Anyone who is teaching it is trying to figure out how best to teach the skills and doing mostly a crap job of it. I learned more reading through a few books and doing my own tests then I ever did paying for that fething piece of paper.

Why don't we go off a mostly complete system. Look at the Beyond the Gates of 40k Thread. Tell me where the major problems are in there. It's alternating activations with reactions as interupts.

 Lance845 wrote:
Why don't we go off a mostly complete system. Look at the Beyond the Gates of 40k Thread. Tell me where the major problems are in there. It's alternating activations with reactions as interupts.

I'll have to catch up on reading it first. That looks like a full rule set, complete with tablet of contents, tons of pages, likely unique interactions to uncover... I'll make that a project for this week.

But frankly, D&D is probably my favorite example of an alternating activation system (not technically but hear me out). The number one problem with alternating activation is assuming all units are equal. This was a problem in old editions where monsters only received a single action and were simply overwhelmed by the party's combos of ability interaction. The sum of their parts returned a whole that was greater than the threat of the monster and so monsters had to be obscenely lethal to even stand a miniscule chance of defeating the party. Later editions fixed that by giving Monsters what is effectively either split fire or multiple activations in a turn so they can perform extra needed actions and threaten more of your own forces. A single action there isn't enough because party synergy while a single Titan activating in 40k is pleeeennty strong due to harsher attrition.

But the number one thing I like about that system is that it's not alternating activations according to player turn. It's according to Initiative. Faster targets can move faster, act quicker, get more done. Slower targets go last and balance can place the more lethal enemies at the slower end of the spectrum. JRPGs do the same, often having ordered lists based on Agility while the boss is insanely slow and often getting a fraction of the number of turns your party receives. Often if the boss is quick, there is a way to slow it down to a crawl to regain the advantage of overwhelming it with more damage per activation than it can match, or as RPGs go more healing per activation than it can damage.

Why the tangent? Because if 40k were to move to an alternating activation system, the number one way to avoid everything we've been arguing about is to bring back Initiative or some equivalent speed stat. Titans would be slow and often go last while speedy Orks and Slaanesh daemonettes and Eldar are often going before much of the slower tanks and behemoths on the field. Alternating activation is an aspect of Attack Wing, which is why I don't disagree with it as a principle! But similarly, the exact method of activating units is based on a speed stat. In that particular case it also reverses each turn. Units that are the first to move are the last to shoot. Units that are last to move are first to shoot. Since the turns are planned and executed simultaneously, it's not so much a choosing form of alternating activation but demonstrates the balance of a speed mechanic to keep elite fighters from simply always being better at everything always.

Now I know I know, "where's the choice in all this?" If you want choice, add ways to interrupt or force a unit to the top of the list. Spend a CP to make this unit activate next regardless of initiative order. That sort of thing. You really shouldn't have many CP as a 1 unit army. But I'm a firm believer that if you want what is effectively simultaneous turns then there needs to be a balancing mechanic that acknowledges that this Goblin is not that same as that Dragon over there and in no way should they be treated likewise. Getting to activate a 50 pt that needs to go to buff some other unit then having you activate your 750 pt mega tyrant and annihilating said unit is not balance.

 Arkaine wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Why don't we go off a mostly complete system. Look at the Beyond the Gates of 40k Thread. Tell me where the major problems are in there. It's alternating activations with reactions as interupts.

I'll have to catch up on reading it first. That looks like a full rule set, complete with tablet of contents, tons of pages, likely unique interactions to uncover... I'll make that a project for this week.

Tons of pages is 16. 9 of which are the actual rules (really about 7 1/2 considering the spaces) and a table of contents before you get to terrain and other miscellaneous nonsense thats not needed to gauge the core rules.

But frankly, D&D is probably my favorite example of an alternating activation system. The number one problem with alternating activation is assuming all units are equal. This was a problem in old editions where monsters only received a single action and were simply overwhelmed by the party's combos of ability interaction. The sum of their parts returned a whole that was greater than the threat of the monster and so monsters had to be obscenely lethal to even stand a miniscule chance of defeating the party. Later editions fixed that by giving Monsters what is effectively either split fire or multiple activations in a turn so they can perform extra needed actions and threaten more of your own forces. A single action there isn't enough because party synergy while a single Titan activating in 40k is pleeeennty strong due to harsher attrition.

But the number one thing I like about that system is that it's not alternating activations according to player turn. It's according to Initiative. Faster targets can move faster, act quicker, get more done. Slower targets go last and balance can place the more lethal enemies at the slower end of the spectrum. JRPGs do the same, often having ordered lists based on Agility while the boss is insanely slow and often getting a fraction of the number of turns your party receives. Often if the boss is quick, there is a way to slow it down to a crawl to regain the advantage of overwhelming it with more damage per activation than it can match, or as RPGs go more healing per activation than it can damage.

1) it's not needed to have all activations be equal. That is a false requirement.

2)DnD is not an alternating activation system. Or even a type of game that can even be comparable. The point of DnDs combat is not to put enemies on an equal footing. It's to create an interesting encounter for the players to always dominate. That system is built from the ground up for an entirely different type of experience that has no comparison what so ever with a miniature war game. If your comparison for alternating activation in 40k is DNDs combat system then you are coming into the discussion with incredible misconceptions on what those systems are meant to do.

Why the tangent? Because if 40k were to move to an alternating activation system, the number one way to avoid everything we've been arguing about is to bring back Initiative or some equivalent speed stat. Titans would be slow and often go last while speedy Orks and Slaanesh daemonettes and Eldar are often going before much of the slower tanks and behemoths on the field. Alternating activation is an aspect of Attack Wing, which is why I don't disagree with it as a principle! But similarly, the exact method of activating units is based on a speed stat. In that particular case it also reverses each turn. Units that are the first to move are the last to shoot. Units that are last to move are first to shoot. Since the turns are planned and executed simultaneously, it's not so much a choosing form of alternating activation but demonstrates the balance of a speed mechanic to keep elite fighters from simply always being better at everything always.

I disagree that that is needed either. In fact i think an initiative/speed stat would FURTHER unbalance the game by making generally slower armies get wrecked by generally faster armies and ruining the major advantages of a alternating activation system. Namely that units are trading blows and adding in the tactical depth and picking and choosing who you activate and when and trying to play that against what you think your enemies will be activating and why.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arkaine wrote:


Now I know I know, "where's the choice in all this?" If you want choice, add ways to interrupt or force a unit to the top of the list. Spend a CP to make this unit activate next regardless of initiative order. That sort of thing. You really shouldn't have many CP as a 1 unit army. But I'm a firm believer that if you want what is effectively simultaneous turns then there needs to be a balancing mechanic that acknowledges that this Goblin is not that same as that Dragon over there and in no way should they be treated likewise. Getting to activate a 50 pt that needs to go to buff some other unit then having you activate your 750 pt mega tyrant and annihilating said unit is not balance.

Im sort of sick of this. Command points are not the is all catch all way to fix issues in the core mechanics. They are a limited resource to add interesting options to a already balanced play field. You shouldn't be required to use a limited resource to patch a broken whole in the core mechanics. Command points are not the fix. The game needs to work first. Then you add in command points to be interesting options.

You keep comparing 1 unit to another instead of one force against another. What an entire army can do with 12 activations is very different from what a equal cost unit can do with 4. There is a kind of balance with that.

 Lance845 wrote:
1) it's not needed to have all activations be equal. That is a false requirement.
2)DnD is not an alternating activation system. Or even a type of game that can even be comparable. The point of DnDs combat is not to put enemies on an equal footing. It's to create an interesting encounter for the players to always dominate. That system is built from the ground up for an entirely different type of experience that has no comparison what so ever with a miniature war game. If your comparison for alternating activation in 40k is DNDs combat system then you are coming into the discussion with incredible misconceptions on what those systems are meant to do.

I take it you've never played the miniatures war game Chainmail. A D&D-based war game. Like 40k, actually. But what isn't like 40k these days... they stole their system from BattleTech.

 Lance845 wrote:
I disagree that that is needed either. In fact i think an initiative/speed stat would FURTHER unbalance the game by making generally slower armies get wrecked by generally faster armies and ruining the major advantages of a alternating activation system. Namely that units are trading blows and adding in the tactical depth and picking and choosing who you activate and when and trying to play that against what you think your enemies will be activating and why.

Seems to work fine in Warhammer Fantasy. Aside from the BS Always Strikes First elf death star shenanigans, normal armies acting and trading blows according to speed tends to work out quite well. Strong greatsword knights act last and slaughter just about anything but not before the fast and squishy horde armies go to try and thin them out first.


Also, we can disagree on what's "necessary" all you'd like but I'm pointing out positive solutions to correcting the previously mentioned issues involved with alternating activation systems. If you still don't agree that there even ARE issues (like the supposed game system is perfect huh?) then I can understand why you may disagree that solutions to them are required.

 argonak wrote:

nou wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Your Infinity example is wrong. You get activations equal to your unit count, you just get to allocate them as you like. Your hypothetical one unit list will get one activation per turn and then sit idle for the rest of the turn.

Also, Infinity is not alternating activations, it's IGOUGO with reactuons.

As usual, you are so literal, that the point goes over your head... So one less extreme example - take one unit comprising 70% of your army strenght and three units comprising 10% each. You get four activations a turn and can use as much as 280% of nominal army strenght each turn...

I dont think anyone would want alternating activations for 40k where you could activate the same unit multiple times, so why go you keep talking about it?

GW already did a game with alternating activations back in what, 1998? Epic Armageddon was fine.

That comment was meant specifically for Peregrine, not advocating on repeated activations in 40K...

And Epic Armageddon worked, because it had power discrepancies between activations (formations) around 5:1 - 10:1. Stock 40K (GW only) has power discrepancies of single activations that can be 20:1 and can be as huge as 80:1 if you include Forge World Titans and bigger superheavies...

 Lance845 wrote:
You keep comparing 1 unit to another instead of one force against another. What an entire army can do with 12 activations is very different from what a equal cost unit can do with 4. There is a kind of balance with that.

And yet I've never seen it in Warhammer. Plenty of times I've watched my Titan go first and delete a huge chunk of the enemy army, including the only threats to my existence on the table, yet I've never watched an enemy zerg threaten such an army in return. Unless all their units went first and opened up a large alpha strike on me. Which they won't in an alternating activation system.

 Arkaine wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
1) it's not needed to have all activations be equal. That is a false requirement.
2)DnD is not an alternating activation system. Or even a type of game that can even be comparable. The point of DnDs combat is not to put enemies on an equal footing. It's to create an interesting encounter for the players to always dominate. That system is built from the ground up for an entirely different type of experience that has no comparison what so ever with a miniature war game. If your comparison for alternating activation in 40k is DNDs combat system then you are coming into the discussion with incredible misconceptions on what those systems are meant to do.

I take it you've never played the miniatures war game Chainmail. A D&D-based war game. Like 40k, actually. But what isn't like 40k these days... they stole their system from BattleTech.

 Lance845 wrote:
I disagree that that is needed either. In fact i think an initiative/speed stat would FURTHER unbalance the game by making generally slower armies get wrecked by generally faster armies and ruining the major advantages of a alternating activation system. Namely that units are trading blows and adding in the tactical depth and picking and choosing who you activate and when and trying to play that against what you think your enemies will be activating and why.

Seems to work fine in Warhammer Fantasy. Aside from the BS Always Strikes First elf death star shenanigans, normal armies acting and trading blows according to speed tends to work out quite well. Strong greatsword knights act last and slaughter just about anything but not before the fast and squishy horde armies go to try and thin them out first.


Also, we can disagree on what's "necessary" all you'd like but I'm pointing out positive solutions to correcting the previously mentioned issues involved with alternating activation systems. If you still don't agree that there even ARE issues (like the supposed game system is perfect huh?) then I can understand why you may disagree that solutions to them are required.

No I never played chainmail. Chainmail doesn't exist anymore for a reason. Same as original flavor dnd. they were bad games.

A system using it and being successful with it does not make it necessary. You are pointing out problems in a theoretical structure instead of an actual codified system of rules. There are good and bad IGOUGO. (MTG is a good IGOUGO) There are good and bad alternating activations.

 Lance845 wrote:
You are pointing out problems in a theoretical structure instead of an actual codified system of rules.

Well you're giving us a theoretical structure instead of an actual game. I've also been pointing out ways to make a working alternating activation system that surpasses the one earlier proposed by targeting and eliminating the flaws in the system while also presenting the reasons IGOUGO is a better system for 40k given the earlier proposed rules. I'm not a miracle worker and I can only work within the scope of the project.

So if you keep pushing your version of a 40k game, I'll keep pointing out the flaws in it. If you want that not to happen, present an ideal concept without said flaws.

(also Chainmail doesn't exist because no one plays miniature wargames enough to satisfy Hasbro)

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/705473.page

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727676.page

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/674042.page

Actual systems.

Chainmail was crap. 40k 7th was crap 6th was crap 5th was crap.

I go back to my statements on Gameplay. Besides building your list, how many actually interesting choices are there in 8th 40k IGOUGO structure.

When and how you spend your CP? Maybe? When and how you deploy? If that even has much of an option?

Which units you pile all of your shots into to focus fire and wipe the enemy off the board?



Every unit you activate in an alternating activation system is it's own interesting choice. You choose who and when. And who and when impacts your opponents next choice. And their choice impacts yours. There is more actual gameplay in the first 20 minutes of alternating activation 40k then there is in 2 hours of IGOUGO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/733847.page

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/734352.page

Here are two more. One is more alternating phases. But still... Better then IGOUGO

 Lance845 wrote:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/705473.page

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727676.page

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/674042.page

Actual systems.

I see only more unproven, untested theoretical structures and a whole lot of hyperbolic conviction regarding a subjective stance.

Maybe our terms differ in usage? I at least tried to point out the factual reasons why the proposed system fails. Even if you have other proposed systems, from what I've seen of your opinions in this thread, what's to say they're any better?

So my fan 8th which has an actual change log as every iteration was tested, and beyond the gates of 40k which is heavily based on using 40ks units in a actual published system are both untested and unproven theoretical structures?

Don't know what to tell you. More games on the market use alternating activations over IGOUGO because more people want actual game play and a quick interactive turn structure. Who would have thought?