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.

To have to be falling back the scout bikers would have already had to suffer at least one batch of attacks, if you saw your 9 squadmates taken down, would you not get the heck out of dodge?

It's swirling maelstrom, not an actual turn based game, the casualties taken in the previous fight phase take into account any casualties taken when falling back.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Simple solution is to make fall back require a roll-off ala Wyches, with a bonus equal to half your current movement value. If the unit that is trying to fall back wins the roll-off, it gets to fall back.

Example: Rhino (in the 3nd wound bracket) tries to fall back from some Banshees. Rhino rolls a D6+2, Banshees roll a D6+3. If the Rhino wins it gets to fall back as per the current rules. If it doesn't it can't fall back.

Example 2: A Coldstar Commander tries to fall back from some Necron Warriors. The Coldstar rolls a D6+10, Necron Warriors roll a D6+2. If the Coldstar wins it gets to fall back as per the current rules. If it doesn't it can't fall back.

This lets speedy units escape slower units.

Alternatively instead of using the roll off rules (which require ties to be re-rolled) make it a separate mechanic where draws result in a fail. This could also be used to give a "1 always fails" rule if desired to give slower units SOME chance of keeping a speedy unit tied up.

I don't believe this would really fix the current issue. Most of the best shooty units have a good movement charcteristic. Doesn't solve anything. I'd rather take the attacks if given a choice.

 iGuy91 wrote:

 Kharneth wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
How about units with fly, instead of taking melee attacks at a -1 to hit, are only hit on 6's when falling back?
I think that might be a way to keep the gimmick, but strengthen melee.

I don't think melee attacks of opportunity should even be -1 to hit, they should be only one 6s to begin with. That is in line with Overwatch. Getting to make full attacks that hit on a -1 during your enemy's movement phase is so overpowered. No one would survive a fall back move. It'd just be "I kill my unit to unlock your unit so I can shoot you."

Alright. Lets run with that then. Disenage instead of fighting that phase, and take fallback attacks hitting on 6+?
Flying units still retain the ability to shoot after disengaging, which retains their little gimmick

No. The disengagement instead of fighting that phase would replace the fallback attack attempt. Charger's attack the enemy and instead of the enemy fight back, they flee as they get attacked. Alternatively, they attack back and then on their turn if they attempt to fallback they get attacked by melee overwatch. Both rules are a bit redundant, the former I think would be a really good ruling, the latter is fine, too, though.

Flying units should still retain the ability to shoot after disengaging. Their little gimmick is not unfair. You're asking too much in my opinion. You're not looking for balance, you're looking for your own power over the power of your foe. Tau deserve the ability to flee from combat without taking damage and then shooting the unit that charged them at the same time. That's completely okay to me. I love that ruling. The thing that I think could stand some modification is marines, guardsmen, and other ground troops being able to flee from combat without any risk. I think falling back from combat should happen during the fight phase. Either you fight or you flee, you shouldn't be able to fight and then fall back immediately after.

 Kharneth wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:

 Kharneth wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
How about units with fly, instead of taking melee attacks at a -1 to hit, are only hit on 6's when falling back?
I think that might be a way to keep the gimmick, but strengthen melee.

I don't think melee attacks of opportunity should even be -1 to hit, they should be only one 6s to begin with. That is in line with Overwatch. Getting to make full attacks that hit on a -1 during your enemy's movement phase is so overpowered. No one would survive a fall back move. It'd just be "I kill my unit to unlock your unit so I can shoot you."

Alright. Lets run with that then. Disenage instead of fighting that phase, and take fallback attacks hitting on 6+?
Flying units still retain the ability to shoot after disengaging, which retains their little gimmick

No. The disengagement instead of fighting that phase would replace the fallback attack attempt. Charger's attack the enemy and instead of the enemy fight back, they flee as they get attacked. Alternatively, they attack back and then on their turn if they attempt to fallback they get attacked by melee overwatch. Both rules are a bit redundant, the former I think would be a really good ruling, the latter is fine, too, though.

Flying units should still retain the ability to shoot after disengaging. Their little gimmick is not unfair. You're asking too much in my opinion. You're not looking for balance, you're looking for your own power over the power of your foe. Tau deserve the ability to flee from combat without taking damage and then shooting the unit that charged them at the same time. That's completely okay to me. I love that ruling. The thing that I think could stand some modification is marines, guardsmen, and other ground troops being able to flee from combat without any risk. I think falling back from combat should happen during the fight phase. Either you fight or you flee, you shouldn't be able to fight and then fall back immediately after.

Eh, neither of my armies really wants to be in melee. Honestly these changes would hurt me more than help me, but melee is in general needing help.
I'm advocating more for Fly to be less a get out of jail free card, and more of a nice benefit to help mitigate an otherwise unfavorable engagement. They should absolutely still be able to fall back and shoot, but maybe instead of taking the attacks like normal ground based units, they are at a -1 to fire after falling back like Ultramarines tactics or something similar?

I'd rather the help come in the form of rebalancing the CC units themselves. Otherwise, Zerkers go from really freaking good to even more really freaking good, while ASM go from garbage to meh.

I guess I need better opponents because I have had no trouble with close combat.

In my early battles I was having the enemy fall back and shoot me to bits. Now I just multi-charge so there's nothing left to shoot back with after they fall back. My friend is working on his all-battlesuits Tau army so I suppose I'll see what that's like once he gets there. His dice are gak, though, so it might make no difference. I saw his 3 Hammerheads literally fail to hit/wound for an entire game.

You're also, I'm guessing, using Berzerkers. Or at least some Chaos units.

When you look at ASM, they're just a bad unit. I don't think the game should be changed to make them a good unit, though. I just think ASM need to be rebalanced.

Banshees, Scoprions, Wraithlords, Kroot Hounds, ASM, Termies, Dreads, Assault Cents - a lot of CC units in the game are just bad. Sure, there are bad shooting units too, but not as high a proportion of shooting units are "bad". This makes people think the rules need to change to make them "good". I'm not sure it's the rules that need to change.

leopard wrote:
don't object to fall back when you can now, just think it should not be without risk

even if a case of "roll 1d6 for every enemy model in the unit being withdrawn from, on a 6+ the falling back unit suffers a mortal wound"

turning your back on an enemy shouldn't be without risk, but breaking from a smaller unit should be safer than from a horde

Whenever someone falls back from me I can't help but think about attacks of opportunity from D&D. Maybe in the next edition of 40k we will get it.

Change the fall back to occur at the end of shooting phase. Units with FLY keyword may fall back at the beginning of shooting phase.

 Kharneth wrote:
I hate it when the enemy falls back and shoots up my berserkers, so I've started combo-charging a lot of units so that if he chooses to fall back he'll be doing so with most of his guys and then will have very few people left to shoot with. I understand this is a tactic that can always be used, but I've found that the extra overwatch is worth it to prevent that unit from shooting me on the following turn after I wipe his unit or it falls back.

No one ever wants to play with my zerkers.

... that sounds suspiciously like tactics sir how dare you!

 gwarsh41 wrote:

leopard wrote:
don't object to fall back when you can now, just think it should not be without risk

even if a case of "roll 1d6 for every enemy model in the unit being withdrawn from, on a 6+ the falling back unit suffers a mortal wound"

turning your back on an enemy shouldn't be without risk, but breaking from a smaller unit should be safer than from a horde

Whenever someone falls back from me I can't help but think about attacks of opportunity from D&D. Maybe in the next edition of 40k we will get it.

Don't like D&D but I know the concept, most games have some sort of "reaction" mechanic

could be a useful one to add as a generic stratagem - 1CP or maybe 2CP and you get to conduct a round of close combat or shooting against a unit as it withdraws - stratagem method limits how often you get to use it to more critical units that could actually make a difference - without say a mob of grots getting to spend time rolling a stack of dice to not a lot of actual effect

could use CP and stratagems for a few "reaction" type mechanics to act out of phase (e.g. shoot during the enemy movement or whatever)

Sure, no fall back in movement phase when charged can happen.

When no charging/moving when shot at happens.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 skchsan wrote:
Change the fall back to occur at the end of shooting phase. Units with FLY keyword may fall back at the beginning of shooting phase.

Let's make Charges happen in Battleshock phase while we're at it! That happens after Combat right? Totally balanced.

I still think -1 works the best. Hitting on 6s means a Rhino is just as likely to hit you when you're falling back as a Captain. How about something like this:

When a unit attempts to fall back, all enemy models within 1" of that unit can make close combat attacks at a -1 penalty. If the unit falling back can FLY, enemy models within 1" may only make 1 attack at a -1 penalty.

This does a couple things:
It makes falling back costly, but not exactly as costly as just being attacked, since only models within 1" (base-ish contact) can fight, not two ranks of models. This should mitigate some of the damage. The -1 to hit also stacks with whatever modifiers they normally have, so it acts like a psuedo initiative thing for weapons like power fists and thunder hammers, which were always easy to run away from in previous editions.

FLY is not the get out of jail free card that it's been, but is still advantageous. Having that one thunder hammer swing swat you out of the sky before you can get enough height is thematic, and anything that can turn 1 attack into multiple (Mortarion) still applies.

Things that normally hit on 6s like tanks cannot successfully attack units that fall back, so tying things up by driving into them won't be as effective as just ramming things that can actually fight into people.

 SputnikDX wrote:
I still think -1 works the best. Hitting on 6s means a Rhino is just as likely to hit you when you're falling back as a Captain. How about something like this:

When a unit attempts to fall back, all enemy models within 1" of that unit can make close combat attacks at a -1 penalty. If the unit falling back can FLY, enemy models within 1" may only make 1 attack at a -1 penalty.

This does a couple things:
It makes falling back costly, but not exactly as costly as just being attacked, since only models within 1" (base-ish contact) can fight, not two ranks of models. This should mitigate some of the damage. The -1 to hit also stacks with whatever modifiers they normally have, so it acts like a psuedo initiative thing for weapons like power fists and thunder hammers, which were always easy to run away from in previous editions.

FLY is not the get out of jail free card that it's been, but is still advantageous. Having that one thunder hammer swing swat you out of the sky before you can get enough height is thematic, and anything that can turn 1 attack into multiple (Mortarion) still applies.

Things that normally hit on 6s like tanks cannot successfully attack units that fall back, so tying things up by driving into them won't be as effective as just ramming things that can actually fight into people.

That looks pretty reasonable, with the exception of Fly units getting better fallback. Most Fly units aren't really FLYING, per say, and moreover they already have the advantage of being able to shoot after falling back.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 SputnikDX wrote:
I still think -1 works the best. Hitting on 6s means a Rhino is just as likely to hit you when you're falling back as a Captain. How about something like this:

When a unit attempts to fall back, all enemy models within 1" of that unit can make close combat attacks at a -1 penalty. If the unit falling back can FLY, enemy models within 1" may only make 1 attack at a -1 penalty.

This does a couple things:
It makes falling back costly, but not exactly as costly as just being attacked, since only models within 1" (base-ish contact) can fight, not two ranks of models. This should mitigate some of the damage. The -1 to hit also stacks with whatever modifiers they normally have, so it acts like a psuedo initiative thing for weapons like power fists and thunder hammers, which were always easy to run away from in previous editions.

FLY is not the get out of jail free card that it's been, but is still advantageous. Having that one thunder hammer swing swat you out of the sky before you can get enough height is thematic, and anything that can turn 1 attack into multiple (Mortarion) still applies.

Things that normally hit on 6s like tanks cannot successfully attack units that fall back, so tying things up by driving into them won't be as effective as just ramming things that can actually fight into people.

That looks pretty reasonable, with the exception of Fly units getting better fallback. Most Fly units aren't really FLYING, per say, and moreover they already have the advantage of being able to shoot after falling back.

Maybe then change the FLY keyword exception to those with the FLYER battlefield role.

 SputnikDX wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 SputnikDX wrote:
I still think -1 works the best. Hitting on 6s means a Rhino is just as likely to hit you when you're falling back as a Captain. How about something like this:

When a unit attempts to fall back, all enemy models within 1" of that unit can make close combat attacks at a -1 penalty. If the unit falling back can FLY, enemy models within 1" may only make 1 attack at a -1 penalty.

This does a couple things:
It makes falling back costly, but not exactly as costly as just being attacked, since only models within 1" (base-ish contact) can fight, not two ranks of models. This should mitigate some of the damage. The -1 to hit also stacks with whatever modifiers they normally have, so it acts like a psuedo initiative thing for weapons like power fists and thunder hammers, which were always easy to run away from in previous editions.

FLY is not the get out of jail free card that it's been, but is still advantageous. Having that one thunder hammer swing swat you out of the sky before you can get enough height is thematic, and anything that can turn 1 attack into multiple (Mortarion) still applies.

Things that normally hit on 6s like tanks cannot successfully attack units that fall back, so tying things up by driving into them won't be as effective as just ramming things that can actually fight into people.

That looks pretty reasonable, with the exception of Fly units getting better fallback. Most Fly units aren't really FLYING, per say, and moreover they already have the advantage of being able to shoot after falling back.

Maybe then change the FLY keyword exception to those with the FLYER battlefield role.

Yeah, that seems legit.

Wait, so Warp Spiders, when they dematerialize instantaneously, are likely to get stabbed in their no-longer-phsyical backs during the 0 amount of time they turn their backs?

Swooping Hawks are just as agile and evasive as Ogryn?

Shining Spears are worse at backing off from CC than Guardsmen?

A Crisis Suit blasting their jetpacks in a Banshee's face has a chance of killing the *Crisis Suit*?

Also, for the -1-to-hit vs 6s-to-hit, the 6s-to-hit make it seem more like Overwatch. If you went that way, though, it might make sense to blanket-copy Overwatch - full attacks, but 6s to hit.

Bharring wrote:
Wait, so Warp Spiders, when they dematerialize instantaneously, are likely to get stabbed in their no-longer-phsyical backs during the 0 amount of time they turn their backs?

Swooping Hawks are just as agile and evasive as Ogryn?

Shining Spears are worse at backing off from CC than Guardsmen?

A Crisis Suit blasting their jetpacks in a Banshee's face has a chance of killing the *Crisis Suit*?

Also, for the -1-to-hit vs 6s-to-hit, the 6s-to-hit make it seem more like Overwatch. If you went that way, though, it might make sense to blanket-copy Overwatch - full attacks, but 6s to hit.

Warp Spiders need time to use their packs. If they were truly instant, why don't they have unlimited movement and the ability to perfectly dodge every single attack ever?

Swooping Hawks... Well, this makes me want to bring back comparative WS. That'd address that issue.

I don't see how Shining Spears are worse than Guardsmen at backing off. If someone retreats from them, their swings are both more likely to hit and do more damage, and if they're the ones falling back, they have better Toughness and Saves to deal with the counterattack.

Crisis Suits... Yes. They SUCK at Close Combat, have very little CC training, so chances are, they don't know how to run away properly. Why on earth SHOULDN'T a Banshee be able to cut down a fleeing Crisis Suit, or at least have a chance?

And I've already said why I don't like copying Overwatch fully.

A hit on a Guardsmen is worth a lot less than a hit on a Shining Spear, but I suppose I'm overstating it.

A Banshee can cut down a Crisis Suit (in theory - in practice, it takes a lot of attacks, as S3 ain't great). It already had it's chance - during it's CC round. Why would it get a second chance just because a Crisis Suit is blasting it in the face with it's jumpjets?

Crisis Suits do suck in close combat. That was factored into the previous Fight phase - where they showed off their sucky CC skills already. Again, why should their suckage apply twice?

Bharring wrote:
A hit on a Guardsmen is worth a lot less than a hit on a Shining Spear, but I suppose I'm overstating it.

A Banshee can cut down a Crisis Suit (in theory - in practice, it takes a lot of attacks, as S3 ain't great). It already had it's chance - during it's CC round. Why would it get a second chance just because a Crisis Suit is blasting it in the face with it's jumpjets?

Crisis Suits do suck in close combat. That was factored into the previous Fight phase - where they showed off their sucky CC skills already. Again, why should their suckage apply twice?

A Crisis suit had its chance to shoot a Banshee, in the shooting phase. Why would it get a second chance just because the Banshees are charging it?

And their suckage is a perfectly fine fluff explanation for a rule that hits Crisis Suits less hard than many other units. Crisis Suits are tougher and have a better save than many other units, meaning they can fall back with less fear than, say, a squad of Marines, or even Ogryns.

I assume your first comment is about Overwatch? That's certainly debatable. For instance, if all it has is Flamers, there's a reasonable chance it couldn't get in range of the Banshees before they charged (something that shouldn't be possible, but Warp Time-style spells + other shenanigans make it more viable than it was).

If you're talking about after falling back? It's "second chance" isnt' because the Banshees charged it. It's it's normal shooting phase, which it is entitled to, because it's a model that isn't destroyed. Fly means that having been charged the previous round doesn't *remove* the "second chance", in addition to whatever else happened due to the charge (such as killing half the unit).

Why should a unit predicated on maneuverability and zipping away from threats then shooting be automatically shut down beyond what the charger can do in CC?

Bharring wrote:
I assume your first comment is about Overwatch? That's certainly debatable. For instance, if all it has is Flamers, there's a reasonable chance it couldn't get in range of the Banshees before they charged (something that shouldn't be possible, but Warp Time-style spells + other shenanigans make it more viable than it was).

If you're talking about after falling back? It's "second chance" isnt' because the Banshees charged it. It's it's normal shooting phase, which it is entitled to, because it's a model that isn't destroyed. Fly means that having been charged the previous round doesn't *remove* the "second chance", in addition to whatever else happened due to the charge (such as killing half the unit).

Why should a unit predicated on maneuverability and zipping away from threats then shooting be automatically shut down beyond what the charger can do in CC?

Yes, a unit with nothing but Flamers only gets one shooting phase if they weren't in range in their shooting phase but are in range for an Overwatch. Unless they get charged by multiple units, in which case their guns magically increase their rate of fire, and let them target several units.

And no, I was talking about Overwatch.

And this doesn't shut them down-this makes them take a little extra damage. So, instead of it being all reward no risk, it becomes high reward nominal risk. Do you fall back, and risk losing some Suits? Or do you stay in combat, and hope against hope that your Suits manage a good CC phase?

I'd definitely agree that, for Tau specifically, this doesn't add much tactics. They suck hard enough in CC that, even with this fall back adjustment, they'd invariably fall back. But for other, more balanced armies... Maybe not so worth it. It adds some more tactics and decision making to the game, which I am all for.

Plus, it helps address to CC/Shooting disparity, which I am also all for.

I stilll don't agree that it's no risk at all. Stay stuck, and the threat can't charge anythign else. Stay stuck, and you strike back first. Stay stuck, and you can concentrate on what's there.

For instance, if Spears charge a Tac squad in the middle of your line, and kill most of it, the Tac squad can fall back. Great, you can now shoot the Spears. But if you had, instead, countercharged with another Tac squad and/or a Captain, you can kill the spears easier for fewer points - and use your dakka to kill other things.

Now, if a Rhino charges my Devs, I'm probably falling back - they aren't gonna do anything to it in CC, and I'm not likely to have a CC vehicle killer nearby. So now my Devs have a -1 to hit this round (I play UM successors).

I'm not sure I wholly disagree with some rebuttle to falling back. I could be persuaded. But a big sticking point is that some units are designed - both by fluff and crunch - to be able to fall back and keep fighting. It seems really odd that those units need to take a beating to do it.

Bharring wrote:
I stilll don't agree that it's no risk at all. Stay stuck, and the threat can't charge anythign else. Stay stuck, and you strike back first. Stay stuck, and you can concentrate on what's there.

For instance, if Spears charge a Tac squad in the middle of your line, and kill most of it, the Tac squad can fall back. Great, you can now shoot the Spears. But if you had, instead, countercharged with another Tac squad and/or a Captain, you can kill the spears easier for fewer points - and use your dakka to kill other things.

Now, if a Rhino charges my Devs, I'm probably falling back - they aren't gonna do anything to it in CC, and I'm not likely to have a CC vehicle killer nearby. So now my Devs have a -1 to hit this round (I play UM successors).

I'm not sure I wholly disagree with some rebuttle to falling back. I could be persuaded. But a big sticking point is that some units are designed - both by fluff and crunch - to be able to fall back and keep fighting. It seems really odd that those units need to take a beating to do it.

Just like some units (a lot more, actually) are designed-by fluff AND crunch-to be able to charge and fight, and it seems really odd they have to go through a second shooting phase to do that?

Debating whether Overwatch should be a thing? Certainly could be debated.

I think Overwatch, no Infiltrate/Outflank/Deepstrike/disembarking charges, etc of 6th were a reaction to units being able to tie things up when they showed up, or overrun the shooting distance of units.

I'd rather most "And then I show up here!" rules (deepstrike/infiltrate/+Movement things) preempted assualt that round than have the Overwatch rule (although some things would need serious rebalancing). But when something from outside your range or outside the battlefield can just show up and smack you with their sword - it makes sense to have some sort of chance to fire your weapon wildly and maybe hit. Not sure we needed both rules.

At any rate, Overwatch isn't the same as falling back and letting your friends try to kill the big demon 10 ft away from them instead of just letting it rampage.

I'd rather allow consolidation after a unit falls back. If there's not enough room to run out, then the fleeing unit can be re-caught (making trapping a unit easier), or to move into another nearby unit (to punish over-relying on screen, or to run into cover as the other army readies their guns. By the same logic of overwatch being the units "not letting themselves be charged without a fight" or fall back "not letting themselves be caught", why should melee units be expected to sit on their thumbs and let the enemy do what they want to them?

I did always think it was dumb that consolidate isn't whenever combat ends, regardless of cause.

In the rule set that I'm working on, my current solution to this is that models within striking range get one automatic hit on the fleeing unit.
I went with that to remove dice rolls but I'm tempted to swap it for the -1 WS idea above. I feel that would be more balanced when comparing units like rhinos with high strength and terrible WS.