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.

So, I've descended down another rung in the ladder of dorkdom and finished drafting up some rules for...
ALT-HAMMER: Alternating Activation Warhammer 40,000

Essentially I wanted to make a simple (two-page) rules plugin that adapts 40k into a unit-by-unit activation turn sequence, instead of the rather plodding i-go-u-go system it is normally. I had to rejigger a few things, but overall I think I'm pretty happy with how it turned out. I'm sure I could boil a few more pounds of fat off it, and I'll probobly hit some horrible snag special rule that breaks the whole thing, but we'll see.
I'm looking to put it through its paces this weekend, but I'd love any feedback you guys might have.

The main problem you do not adress is ICs, as they can shift units or even create brand new units on the fly, its not written HOW they work within the rules when joining, forming or leaving units.

Ah, good catch, thankyou. How does something like this ring?

INDEPENDENT CHARACTERS
If an Independent Character joins an un-activated unit, the joined unit automatically activates and may continue its Psychic, Shooting, and Charging phases (but may not move farther). If an Independent Character joins an activated unit, it forgoes the rest of its phases. To leave a unit, an Independent character may be activated by itself leaving the unit un-activated, or the unit may be activated by itself to leave the Independent Character un-activated. Independent Characters may not join units already locked in Close Combat (though they may Charge as separate units).

We've had long arguments about alternating unit activation on other threads; the main problem is that you punish people for running more units since the person with fewer bigger units gets to attack with all his stuff in the time the person with more smaller units gets to attack with some smaller percentage of his stuff. Alternating activation is all well and good for a symmetrical game, but in 40k a 1,500pt army could be five units or fifteen units. You'd need to address that inherent problem in these rules; which could require a fairly extensive rejiggering of the rules as a whole.

Eh, just use the "Dice Bag" mechanic from Bolt Action.

Every unit contributes a dice (counter, etc) into a bag. Draw a counter, and that player can do stuff with one unit. Then discard the counter and draw another...

An alternative to this would be "I MOVE YOU MOVE, I SHOOT YOU SHOOT" sort of setup. I reckon that has potential to be far fairer than IGOUGO - imagine a melee army charging a gunline, IGOUGO gives one side a massive advantage, but a staggered phase resolution would mean that neither side gets that "free" action before the other

In my "dream version" of a combined turn system, all the shooting would take place at once. IE you would shoot with your units, but even if you kill guys or blow a weapon off a tank, they still get to shoot back this turn, and then damage is applied after all the shooting. (You could lay guys down similar to necrons to remind yourself of how many guys need to be removed after the shooting phase, or use a die etc.)

Thanks for the comments guys.
@AnomanderRakeMade: The counter to this, at least from what I found from playing today, was that the player with more units has more tactical versatility, as they can delay units they want in order to react at the opportune moment. The player with less units MUST activate all their units, but sometimes they will want to delay them until after an enemy unit has activated (for example, moved closer). If I have more units, I can use less important units to delay the activations of my more important units to counter-assault, or stack up say, 3 or 4 leman russes at the end of the turn to all shoot in succession. I havent played to the extremes against say, an army of paladins vs MSU tyranids or something, but it doesn't seem all that lop sided , at least for for sane armies.

@Dakkamite: How does the bolt action sequence work exactly? I've never played but heard people talking about it. Does each unit have a specific marker, or player-specific markers?
I've considered playing around with a 'phased' turn sequence where both players move/move, shoot/shoot, assault/assault, and I'll definitely try it out some time (it certainly is easier to incorporate into the rule set without changing as much).

@niv-mizzet: That sounds interesting, if not incredibly bloody. I wonder if something similar to the assault phase could be adopted? Every time two units engage in a firefight, shots are fired by both units in initiative order?

I played two games today, and both were pretty close affairs without much problem. Both players got the gist of the rules with a few minutes of rundown, and the turns progressed pretty smoothly without many "wait uh... how does this work?"
First game was my khorne marines versus necrons with a close 1-point victory to chaos. Second game was against droppod deathwatch marines (salamanders and space wolves), again with only a 1-point victory for chaos (this time using tactical objectives).
Few things were learned. Things seem a bit weighted to melee (especially fast things) as they can move and assault early in the turn without suffering much fire. In the second game we tried to rectify this by making units that have charged still targetable by shooting, until they get locked in combat proper. This worked out pretty well, and I'll definitely look how to integrate it into the rules better.
Second, because the alternating activation changes up the game so much, certain army-styles arent as effective, primarily armies that rely on alpha-striking. This is pretty intentional, as I think alphastriking is a pretty un-fun way to play the game, but it's worth nothing that both players should be aware of the type of game this is, and make their armies accordingly. For example, my deathwatch opponent had about 5 droppods, which are simple not able to erase large-swaths of my army without me retaliating in some way like they can in normal 40k. This, imho, is a good thing, but it means he was paying points for rules he wasnt getting as much use out of, so next time he'll adjust his army accordingly. Things like gunline heavy armies I think will have a much different experience, as they can't simply obliterate chunks of the opponent all at once, we'll slowly be chipping away at each other at the same time, more or less.

Player specific.

If I have five units and you have three, we put five blue dice and three red ones into a bag. One dice is drawn out - if blue, I can move/shoot/etc with one unit, then I leave the dice next to it to show its gone.

Then we draw again, and you'll have a higher chance of going because I have one less dice in the bag than before. Whichever colour is drawn, that player can move/etc with one unit that hasn't gone yet. Continue until the bag is empty, then stick all the dice back in.

Really interested in this thread as I think the biggest problem with 40k for me isn't balance, but instead the clunky turn system. It's just boring watching someone move their troops, especially if they play horde. I think the X-Wing turn system is great and would like to see it tried out in 40k. Lowest initiative units move first up to highest, but then highest get to attack first in the attack phase. This could help deal with the benefits that someone gains for having more cheap units as they will likely have low initiative.

Good initiative!

I also always found the turn sequence in the Warhammer series less involving. It has it's perks though. In a beer and pretzel kind of setting I can have a pizza while my friend takes his turn, which is not a bad thing considering a big game can take several hours!

I think allowing a unit to do all phases in one go will break the game. For example the rules are designed so that you should always (well in 99% of the cases) get to shoot at an enemy before they get to rip you in close combat. With your system a cunning player with many units could easily deepstrike a unit last in turn N and then activate that unit first in the turn N+1, thus effectively side stepping the most obvious draw back of deep striking. Similar argument could be made for transports without the assault vehicle rule.

Drawing tokens from a bag is a good simple way of mitigating some of the problems with unequal number of units. Good idea!

Currently, all units arriving from reserve must be activated first in the turn, before any others on the table. So units deepstriking in have to arrive first, and are still subjected to mostly an entire turn. The first player position also changes every turn to the person who didn't activate last in the previous turn, so a player can never activate a unit last in a turn, then first in the following turn. there will always be at least one activation in between.

But getting assault units in quick was a bit of an issue with the first game that I played, which is why we decided to let units that have charged also be targeted by shooting for the rest of the turn.
For example, my juggernaut lord and spawn bodyguard were in a good position, and I activated them to assault my opponent's grey hunters using my first unit activation of the turn. Normally, theyd be locked in combat from now on, and safe from anything shooting them. But instead, they made their charge, and locked the squad they charged from moving or shooting, but any other unit could continue to shoot at either squads for the rest of the turn, before combat was actually resolved. Consolidation was made later during the start of combat, so that both units wernt forced to bunch up for templates/blasts. When combat starts proper, then both units are locked in proper and cannot be shot at.

As alternating phases has been mentioned.
Eg.
A moves.
B move.
A shoots
B shoots
A assaults
B assaults.

And the alternative of interleaved phases,
A moves.
B shoots
A reacts.

B moves
A shoots
B reacts.

I have found alternating actions work quite well too.it is the closest to simultaneous resolution I can get with out over complicated resolution.

Command phase.
Both players place order counters face down next to units.And request off table support.


Primary action phase,
The attacker takes first action of order with all units one at a time, revealing the order counters as they go.
The defender takes first action of order with all units one at a time, revealing the order counters as they go.

Secondary Action phase.

The attacker takes the second action of the order counter with all units one at a time, removing the order counter as they go.
The defender takes the second action of the order counter with all units one at a time, removing the order counter as they go.

Resolution phase,
Rally units on poor morale, plot arrivals etc(Resolve any outstanding situations before the start of the next game turn.

This simulates looking at the attacker for a brief period of time, then looking at the defender to see what they have done in the same period of time.
Players take turns performing one action with all units.

Actions are move, attack and ready.
To give the orders,

Advance, Move then Attack.(ranged)
Charge, Move then Attack, (Assault)
Double time , Move then Move.
Evade, Attack then move.
Fire support, ready then attack.
Infiltrate , Ready then move.

Just some alternatives for consideration.