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.

Basically the title.

Just curious as to whether anyone preferred the Initiative system from previous editions, or whether everyone now prefers the current system for resolving combats?

Well, initiative was a vital part of the system.
Aeldari kin had highest initiative while Orks has lowest.
The game has lost an edge.

I do wonder if a WHFB compromise would be viable.
Say you set the initiative of the actual units between 2 and 9.
Some weapon set you to initiative 1 when used.
Charging set you to initiative 10 in the turn you charged.

... and then we would have stratagems to raise Ork initiative, Tau equipment to lower the charger's initiative... and so on because gotta sell those codices, boy.

Absolutely. I miss a lot about 7th so I started a Heresy army. There's some cool initiative shenanigans here, I like the elements it adds.

Yes and no. The problem with the Initiative system is that it didn't vary enough within each army list, so (for instance) Eldar characters weren't allowed to be able to actually win combat because they struck first and they'd have invalidated other people if they could (see: Elves in duels in WHFB where "always strikes first" was their defining keyword).

Initiative in 30k is much better-done because it affects it with weapons more and because everyone's Initiative is closer together so smaller differences actually matter. Taking a powerfist on a SM character in 7th was a no-brainer because everything that mattered was striking before him anyway, taking it in 30k is a trade-off because you get to choose whether you want to make weaker attacks before the enemy or make stronger attacks after the enemy.

Emperor's Children striking at +1 initiative with AP2 weapons is really strong for example in a power armour based game (for obvious reasons), but they only get that if they make the charge, otherwise they will trade out expensive elites with tactical squads at the same iniatitive. It's a really cool element that promotes tactical play as well as list building like the above comment said so well.

I miss it quite a bit, losing initiative mean that armies that relied on being fast in combat/hitting first are invalidated. It makes combat less impactful now that you don't have to worry about charging what should be a fast unit.

I miss some things sure. i think initiative was fine, always strike last was bad and make taking certain weapons hot garbage.

but then its not that bad now. most of those speedy armies gets rules that let them strike first anyway.

Not at all. I didn't like that a unit that managed to race across a field of explosions and lasers could have their efforts invalidated because the enemy unit has a higher stat, and I'm speaking as someone who mainly played nids when initiative was a thing.

I dont really miss it, it wasn't used for a whole lot, largely just CC attack order, and didn't vary enough to matter within armies much (oh look, literally everything in the book is I4 except the HQ dudes that are I5).

I haven't really felt like anything was missing with its loss, especially at the scale the game is played at. Most of the very few non CC Init related mechanics didn't work so well when they were attempted (e.g. jaws of the world wolf), and the stats application was always limited and far more appropriate to skirmish or RPG scale game.

Nope. Initiative was crap.

It was a cumbersome system that made stuff complex and resulted in things like Orks who wanted to be in melee getting their asses handed to them before they could do anything with it.

I despised initiative. It seemed ridiculous that units charging into combat where suddenly striking after their opponents, and often meant that dedicated close combat units in Power Armour armed with weapons like power fists and axes were worthless since they'd be killed before they could even strike.

I miss Initiative, because it gave extra value to woods/area terrain. Charging into terrain meant you struck last (or gave the defenders Initiative 10, I don't remember) which made positioning your troops more important. I remember my 4th edition Grey Knights army... it was vital you placed your marines in cover to receive a charge, so you could unload with storm bolters and then when the enemy got close you could swing first with 2 attacks, both hitting at strength 6.

Initiative was pretty one-sided IMO, and unfair to a lot of factions who just had baseline low initiative for their stats and since GW LOVES to copy paste statlines rather than have varying levels based on their army roles, it meant guys like Necrons had a rough time with Flayed Ones and Lychguard ever really getting to swing, and same with Orks. I know one friend of mine with high initiative army, Slaanesh Daemons, hated the way it worked since terrain would screw him over since they never came with grenades so would always strike last since anything worth charging would hide out inside terrain. Alternating different units now makes a lot more tactical sense IMO with choosing how many units you want to charge in a turn, and with the interrupt 2CP stratagem gives some leeway for someone on the receiving side to do something before everything dies.

Speaking as an Eldar player (high Initiative) I actually don't miss it.
Being faster and thus getting to go first by charging is good enough.
I often found Initiative didn't matter anyway. You either had grenades, or you didn't.

As much as the nuance was cool in theory, in practice, I'm glad it's one less thing to worry about.
Same goes for the WS v WS chart. And Str vs AV. The 8E statline is streamlined and I like it.

-

I have to agree with the nay-sayers. Eldar and Nids are already faster than my Marines and have better strats/abilities/psychic powers for getting into melee, if I do manage to charge them I deserve to benefit from pulling it off. Under the old system the guy with the lower initiative never had a reason to charge.

I miss it.

It was dumb and horribly binary, I'm very glad it's gone.

Not missing at all. Like Leadership, there were so many things that made Initiative pointless anyways. It was so rare that I would make a charge where I was striking first. I was always either striking last or simultaneous. Even when it did matter, it often didn't matter, as the units getting into combat were just so much deadlier and resistant than the units they were fighting.

So, yeah, it mattered in the case where a close combat unit attacked another close combat unit and the target of the charge wasn't in cover and one unit had a higher initiative than others (and since most characters had Initiative 5, that was pretty rare too).

I much prefer the current system. All chargers go first. Watch your charges due to way models pile in. You can interrupt if really important at a cost, but it could be worth it. When lots of forces get stuck in combat you get into an interesting back-and-forth game.

No. Initiative was one of the worst mechanics in all of 40k.

People like to toss around accusations that a lot of different stuff makes the game 'untactical', well initiative is the least tactical mechanic possible. My number bigger than yours? Remove model.

CQC was atrocious in previous editions, being essentially just an excel spreadsheet that A. Hated you and B. Took 45 minutes to compile.

No.

ERJAK wrote:
[...]
People like to toss around accusations that a lot of different stuff makes the game 'untactical', well initiative is the least tactical mechanic possible. My number bigger than yours? Remove model.

I disagree. With proper balance, I should be factoring in that my Tac Marines will swing first when deciding how much firepower to put into the Ork Boyz squad that's going to make contact next turn vs the squad behind it. It *can* be very tactical. Although that would have required better balancing.

CQC was atrocious in previous editions, being essentially just an excel spreadsheet that A. Hated you and B. Took 45 minutes to compile.

While I agree with this statement, I still miss it. It had a lot of upsides - like elite units "winning combat" even without killing many doods.

We still use it. The difference being from previous editions is that we still use charge bonus attacks where applicable, and THOSE attacks go first. So even a last initiative weapon will go first once on the charge, etc.

 amanita wrote:
We still use it. The difference being from previous editions is that we still use charge bonus attacks where applicable, and THOSE attacks go first. So even a last initiative weapon will go first once on the charge, etc.

Eh?

 Yarium wrote:
Not missing at all. Like Leadership, there were so many things that made Initiative pointless anyways. It was so rare that I would make a charge where I was striking first. I was always either striking last or simultaneous. Even when it did matter, it often didn't matter, as the units getting into combat were just so much deadlier and resistant than the units they were fighting.

So, yeah, it mattered in the case where a close combat unit attacked another close combat unit and the target of the charge wasn't in cover and one unit had a higher initiative than others (and since most characters had Initiative 5, that was pretty rare too).

I much prefer the current system. All chargers go first. Watch your charges due to way models pile in. You can interrupt if really important at a cost, but it could be worth it. When lots of forces get stuck in combat you get into an interesting back-and-forth game.

I agree. the current system (at least in theory) presents choice, and choice is good. I think the initiative stat was one of the vestigial elements of the RPG days.

I don’t miss it, and I thought I would. I prefer the new choices/tactics around who fights first than a guarantee based on stat line.

I don't, but to be fair the only people I really knew that liked it had high initiative armies and always got to go first. Almost never heard an Ork, Necron, or Tau player say they missed it.

I'm not sure if the new system is perfect, but I do like how you're rewarded for pulling off the charge. Before an Ork mob could charge a bunch of marines, doing everything right, and still lose a ton of Boyz before he could even swing because the marines just got to go first even if they played bad. It was a lazy system and didn't reward smart play. You basically decided combat in the list phase and knew how things were going to go down before the first swing.

Maybe having charging add a bonus to initiative would've worked so that the initial charge rewarded smart playing but getting into a melee in the center over multiple turns was good for some armies and bad for others, encouraging different playstyles. But as it sat in 7th it was a bad system unless you were a marine, eldar, or mid player.

One of the few simplifications of 8th I actually like. I love CC but it's probably the slowest phase over all since both players have things to do.

Having one side or the other just swing depending on turn or charge is quicker than this one IC is I8 most of my troops are I4, most of your guys are I2 but the drones are as quick as a marine.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I don't, but to be fair the only people I really knew that liked it had high initiative armies and always got to go first. Almost never heard an Ork, Necron, or Tau player say they missed it.

I'm not sure if the new system is perfect, but I do like how you're rewarded for pulling off the charge. Before an Ork mob could charge a bunch of marines, doing everything right, and still lose a ton of Boyz before he could even swing because the marines just got to go first even if they played bad. It was a lazy system and didn't reward smart play. You basically decided combat in the list phase and knew how things were going to go down before the first swing.

Maybe having charging add a bonus to initiative would've worked so that the initial charge rewarded smart playing but getting into a melee in the center over multiple turns was good for some armies and bad for others, encouraging different playstyles. But as it sat in 7th it was a bad system unless you were a marine, eldar, or mid player.

I play Orks and I enjoyed initiative. It's another aspect of a unit's combat ability which helps make each unit and race play a bit differently.

I'd be fine with it returning, if only because the new WS method is pretty poor (not being comparative, etc.) If better units struck first regardless of being charged, it would negate a lot of that. Ideally I would see the WS converted to a similar system they use for wounding in 8th. A simpler version of the old table would have been nice.

They changed the way stat lines work, but then they didn't bother actually changing stat-lines. The entirety of 8th could be better if they explored the stat lines far more when redoing the game.