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.

This is an automated message added by the articles system.

A new article titled Fireing into assault has been added to the dakka articles system.

This message thread is for the discussion of content in the article.

If you have anything to add to the article, then just jump in and edit it by going to the actual article page and clicking 'edit' (the link can be found just above the article). If there is no edit link then the article is locked for now, so just add your comments or content to this thread and if they are appropriate then they should eventually get merged in.

If there is something in the article that you wish to debate or comment on, then this is the place to do it. Just hit the reply button and get chatting! You need to be registered and logged in to post in the forums so if you are an anonymous article editor then now would be a great time to register and join in dakka's great forum discussion!

Let me know what you think guys and gals i admit its not perfect but the focus was to inflict wounds on both squads in the assault and not to be overly complicated.

Also note there are not currently any rules for more then 2 units involved in the assault. Those involved with making these rules haven't agreed on those rules so i have not posted them we are open to suggestions.

Uh...

My take would be that 40k is complicated enough without completely breaking the rules to come up with your own. At that point, you're no longer playing 40k.

BUT you could be playing 40k if you were the game creator of 6th edition and made these rules apart of it.

Dash, I don't think it's necessary to discourage people from sharing house rules that they feel others may like to try out. 'Completely breaking the rules' is hardly a fair judgement.

Huh, never quite thought of using the cover save to apply wounds to their own side. I've played with shooting into assault with house rules, but a little different to take into account ballistic skill of the shooter. Like, if you have SM shooting into assault with them and Orks, first they roll to hit, any shots the hit are allocated to the Orks and stay there. Next, with the misses, you roll again to hit, but the misses are allocated to their own side.

So, let's say it was 12 bolter shots, on average 8 are going to be allocated to the Orks, and there will be 4 misses. Of those misses, on average, 1.33 are going to hit Space Marines and the rest are going to hit nothing.

I do think the cover save being used to allocate hits to your own side is interesting, and not without merit. I just think that units with a higher BS are less likely to hit their own allies, this makes it more likely that units with a high BS will hit allies (as they get more hits to start with). Also, what do you do when the unit's armor is a higher value than the 4+ cover save? Like, if it was Guardsmen shooting at 'nids in close combat. The lasgun shots can be stopped by the 6 save, so are rolls of a 6 to save classified as stopped by the armor or by the cover? If it's by the armor, then you're giving the disadvantage to armies with lighter armor, as shots against them in close combat are less likely to hit the enemy than they are to hit them. The scenario given means that half of the wounds caused are going to be allocated to the Space Marines, but the scenario I gave would only allocate 1/3 of the wounds to the Guardsmen.

My group had considered using ballistic skills but decided that because your shooting into a melee, it doesn't really matter how good of a shot you are. The movement is just too chaotic and unpredictable to make a clean shot. Therefore we decided on a cover save of 4+ to make it a 50% chance of hitting friendly or enemy units.

(we do have a special ability for snipers they can give up rending. In order to be able to shoot into melee only possibly wounding friendly units on a to hit roll of 1.)

The second point of the lower armor saves is probably due to my wording of the examples. Armor saves only comes into effect if the target's save is better then 4+ like the space marines 3+ armor save.

Ah, okay, that at least makes some sense. Oh, and something I just remembered, we do leadership checks to see if the unit is evil willing to shoot. Because that squad of guardsmen might not be willing to fire upon their buddies or maybe those orks are scared that the warboss will feed them to the squig if they kill a fellow ork.

Wow I really like the idea of the leadership thing.
The ruthless general or the schemeing git of a nob may be willing to order the shot but the soldiers may not be willing to take the shot. I really really like that.

Do you allow vehicles to fire into close combat?

Yes, we do that's why we covered template weapons shooting into combat.

Of course there should be firing into HtH, what about all the situations where the firers couldn't hurt their own side anyway...
Like Marines firing into a CC with a friendly dreadnought getting swarmed? Or Shuriken Catapults and a wraithlord? Or firing on models that arent in 2 inches of an assault, essentially unengaged?
Or what about hopeless assaults where the guys are dead anyway?
Troops firing into a tyranid/dreadnought/wraithlord assault where the basic models in hand to hand can't even hurt the target anyway?

There probably out to be voluntary fallback rules also, with some effect for swinging at the disengaging guys and a morale penalty.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Want to get-on Google's first page and loads of traffic to your website? Hire a SEO Specialist from Ocean Groups seo pecialist

The goal was to keep it as simple as possible whether the shots can damage your models is irrelevant to the rules of being able to shoot at them.

In fact if you can't damage the Dreadnaught with your weapons why wouldn't a general give the order to shoot into the assault this is one of the many reasons my group plays with this house rule in our friendly games.

Same with an assault where your guys are dead anyway this is another reason why we came up with the rules. Thier our countless times when shooting into an assault and probably wound some of your own units could be strategicaly sound.

Fall back rules and disengaging is covered by the hit and run special rule that characters can have. There are sceneario games where all units count as have the special rule hit and run so... a house rule isn't really necessary.

Editing the article, I came across something that wasn't very clear. In your Example 1, do the Space Marines use the 3+ armour or the 4+cover. Being Space Marines, I'd think it's far better for them to use their armour, and you say so later in the paragraph, so if they were all saved by the 3+, then what's the relevance of the example if it doesn't show off the new mechanic?

if firing into an assualt, you should roll the 4+, allocate 1,2,3 to thier own units, who take any applicable save, and 4,5,6 to enemy units, who take any appliciable save

Oh, so it becomes two "layers" of saves?

Your house rules are too generous to the attacker. Instead, allow firing into close combat but allow the defender to allocate wounds to any model in the close combat.

Dashofpepper wrote:Uh...

My take would be that 40k is complicated enough without completely breaking the rules to come up with your own. At that point, you're no longer playing 40k.

Alright first, grow up, your a well known Dakka user and you should know better then just to put useless and silly comment. First you abuse the OP of his/her post and house rules (there house rules for feth sakes) and second your showing a huge amount of discorugement towards an fun idea people could take with them if they wanted

There should definitely be firing into assault.

It makes total sense. If a swarm of unamoured gretchin are mobbing some SM termies or something, any commander with a brain would happily rinse them in gunfire as your far more likely to hit a greenskin or ping harmlessly off your brothers armour!

Now they just need to make some sensible rules for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tread'Ead wrote:My group had considered using ballistic skills but decided that because your shooting into a melee, it doesn't really matter how good of a shot you are. The movement is just too chaotic and unpredictable to make a clean shot. Therefore we decided on a cover save of 4+ to make it a 50% chance of hitting friendly or enemy units.

(we do have a special ability for snipers they can give up rending. In order to be able to shoot into melee only possibly wounding friendly units on a to hit roll of 1.)

The second point of the lower armor saves is probably due to my wording of the examples. Armor saves only comes into effect if the target's save is better then 4+ like the space marines 3+ armor save.

I think that is a great rule as well!

Its exactly 50/50 if you hit your own guys, but if your own guys are heavily armoured and your opponents aren't, then why the hell wouldn't you?

mattyrm wrote: There should definitely be firing into assault.

It makes total sense. If a swarm of unamoured gretchin are mobbing some SM termies or something, any commander with a brain would happily rinse them in gunfire as your far more likely to hit a greenskin or ping harmlessly off your brothers armour!

Now they just need to make some sensible rules for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tread'Ead wrote:My group had considered using ballistic skills but decided that because your shooting into a melee, it doesn't really matter how good of a shot you are. The movement is just too chaotic and unpredictable to make a clean shot. Therefore we decided on a cover save of 4+ to make it a 50% chance of hitting friendly or enemy units.

(we do have a special ability for snipers they can give up rending. In order to be able to shoot into melee only possibly wounding friendly units on a to hit roll of 1.)

The second point of the lower armor saves is probably due to my wording of the examples. Armor saves only comes into effect if the target's save is better then 4+ like the space marines 3+ armor save.

I think that is a great rule as well!

Its exactly 50/50 if you hit your own guys, but if your own guys are heavily armoured and your opponents aren't, then why the hell wouldn't you?

It is very fluffy but it can really benefit too much IG who can just tie you up with conscripts or platoons and then just blow the hell out of you