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.

After playing a few games of Kill team (the latest GW version) I was wondering if this game would not benefit from a different turn system that would make it more tactical.
This is based on Bushido of which I am quite a fan.

Make a setup in battlerounds, do a roll off and then
each model can play its entire turn in an I go U go system. If your opponent has more models then you, you get pass tokens to make up the difference.
So player A does an entire turn with marine A
Then player B does an entire turn with Biker A
Back to player A to choose a model etc.
If every model has moved and done its thing it is back to the next battleround (do a roll off who gets to start and redetermine pass tokens)

and every models gets to retaliate only 1x in an enemy assault phase per battleround.

What do you guys think?

The main downside to this is that MSU killteams can force their opponents to commit to a set of actions before they have to make any meaningful decisions of their own.

So if I'm running, say, cultists spam against a relatively elite force of foot marines or aspect warriors, I can shuffle a couple cultists around behind terrain while my opponent moves his guys up in the hopes of eventually having something to attack. After his 11ish marines or aspect warriors have advanced and either not attacked, run, or taken pot shots at cultists who can go to ground behind cover, I move the rest of my cultists into position to take pot shots at the most vulnerable targets and move in such a way as to mitigate retalliation on my opponent's next turn.

Regarding the assault phase thing, it might be cleaner to have a single shared assault phase at the end of the game turn. So models who charged would get charging bonuses and you'd resolve everything as a single assault phase rather than keeping track of 20 different assault phases and trying to remember who had and hadn't already retaliated.

Wyldhunt wrote:
The main downside to this is that MSU killteams can force their opponents to commit to a set of actions before they have to make any meaningful decisions of their own.

For this reason I would give pass tokens, for each model your opponent has more then you have (say you play 6 he plays 8) at the start of the gameturn you get 1 pass token (so in the example you would get 2 pass tokens)
They can be used instead of moving/playing a model.
This allows the low model guy to have the possibility to wait or move.


I have to think/playtest about that combined assault-subphase. not a bad idea.

 minisnatcher wrote:

Wyldhunt wrote:
The main downside to this is that MSU killteams can force their opponents to commit to a set of actions before they have to make any meaningful decisions of their own.

For this reason I would give pass tokens, for each model your opponent has more then you have (say you play 6 he plays 8) at the start of the gameturn you get 1 pass token (so in the example you would get 2 pass tokens)
They can be used instead of moving/playing a model.
This allows the low model guy to have the possibility to wait or move.


I have to think/playtest about that combined assault-subphase. not a bad idea.

Hmm. I'm not sure how I'd feel about the pass token idea. It introduces another form of bookkeeping to deal with throughout the game, but it could also address my previous concern.

In general, I really like the idea of alternating turns. I just tend to like such systems better in games where the number of units are relatively close in number. One idea I've kicked around is alternating UNIT turns where all the models taken as part of a given unit do their movement/psychic/shooting at the same time, then your opponent selects all the models form a unit to do the same, repeat until all units have been activated. It's not a perfect solution, but the number of units in kill team tend to be quite a bit closer than the number of models.

Bushido (another skirmish game) uses the pass token system and I have not found it to be a bookkeeping problem in that game. On the contrary a well timed use of a pass token can be a great tactical advantage and adds to the tactical dept of the game.

With alternating units, it would loose a bit of balance. As you can have 3 units vs 1 unit. Where the 3 unit player can move an unimportant unit to see what the other player does and then make a decision with the important part of his army.. I think I would prefer alternating models or alternating turns to that.

The problem I found with alternating turns in Kill team is that basically most of our games are over in 2-3 turns. Not that the game is really over, but you know who is going to win without much real tactical play. Only starting position and the luck you have with the shots on your key models turn 1 and 2.
Alternating models can change the idea of when to move. ex. let us say you want to move your biker specialist with plasma deep in enemy territory and take out the enemy captain. You might think twice of doing that as a first action as they can be charged and shot at before back up arrives. If you have alternating turns the same situation can just allow you to move and shoot with 3 bikers, then move in your assault guys and no chance for retaliation what so ever.

Now off course for a game like 40k itself I would prefer alternating turns. no doubt about it.

Simplify the whole thing and go with an easy card deck or dice bag.

At the start of a turn, place one coloured dice for each of your models in play, opponent does likewise (with different coloured dice) - alternatively place a playing card in a deck, each with a separate suit etc. As drawn the player is allowed to activate a single model (possibly drawing until a different colour is drawn, allowing the player to perform small stringed actions).

Super simple, easy, and allows the person with more models more tactical flexibility/options (as it should).