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, Seize the Initiative has always been one of my least favorite mechanics in 40k. I understand the purpose, in forcing attackers to be a little cautious when deploying so that they can't be punished too much on the off chance, but it's always been too... Random, I guess. For something so potentially massive and game-changing, the fact that it's a random dice roll with little influence just rubs me the wrong way. About 80% of games that I saw in 6th and 7th that had the initiative seized went the way of the seizer. I can't say for certain in 8th, but it's looking like that massive advantage is here to stay, especially with how bloody this edition can be.

I like the idea of one player juking another and taking first turn away, and how that possibility makes players cautious, I just wish it wasn't a complete crapshoot as to whether or not you get it. Something like that wouldn't take luck, it would take planning, precision, careful calculation, and someone smart in a position of, well...
You guessed it.
Command.

(Okay, no points for figuring out where I was going there, it's in the danged title of the post.)


So what I propose is that Seizing the Initiative is removed, and replaced with a Stratagem by the same name:
Seize the Initiative:
Cost 1+
After deployment but before the first turn, the player going second may choose to attempt to seize the initiative. If they do so, both players roll off. Whoever wins may choose to take the first turn. On a tie, nothing happens, and turn order continues as normal.
Before rolling off, either player may choose to spend any number of additional Command Points, getting +1 on their roll for each player spent. The player who is not attempting to seize the initiative nominates the number of Command Points they will be spending first, followed by the player attempting to seize.



Aside from my wording not reading very smooth, thoughts? Is it too lenient? Too harsh? Do you think it leans too much in favor of large MSU armies (who will have the Command Points to spare)?
This makes Seizing much more likely (about 1/3rd instead of 1/6th), but gives it a mandatory minimum cost and allows more nuance between both players.

It would have a massive impact on the game and list making

So currently, when you run of drops you go first

The best way to run out of drops quick tends to be avoiding troops or bringing transports for them, basically you tend not to have a ton of Command Points.

Which means an army built to maximize command points will probably always go second.Considering the ultimate command point bonus is a massive +9 this means that any Battalion will probably always go second then steal first.

Think about it
Player 1 will have 5~6 Command Points
Player 2 will likely have at least 12 Command Points

Player 1 will then be locked out of spending CP for the roll off since if he does, he will still lose. Then both players start with 0 CP.

Which brings us to our next case, both armies have a Battalion and 12 CP.

Player 1 is basically trapped in this situation. He can either
A - Spend all 12 CP, which will make his opponent
1 - Spend nothing, and force his opponent to play with 0. While he has 12.
2 - Spend 12, which again forces both players to play with 0.

B - Once again Spend nothing, and just allow his opponent to go first.

This now causes another balance issue... CP Escalation which leads to Excess Strategem usage, which leads to more balance issues.

Basically, this idea is cool... but it's like removing the bottom jenga piece. It might cause it all to fall apart.

What I would actually enjoy is a system used in some other games. Get any token to represent command points. They have to be small enough to fit a bunch in your hand.

If one players army is made up of less power or points they gain 1 additional command point.

The player with the least amount of units gains an additional command point.

Each player bids a number of their points by putting them in their hand and concealing the rest of their pile. When both players are ready they reveal their bids at the same time. The player who bid the most goes first. Roll off for ties. Any command points bid are lost, even if you didn't win initiative.

 Lance845 wrote:
What I would actually enjoy is a system used in some other games. Get any token to represent command points. They have to be small enough to fit a bunch in your hand.

If one players army is made up of less power or points they gain 1 additional command point.

The player with the least amount of units gains an additional command point.

Each player bids a number of their points by putting them in their hand and concealing the rest of their pile. When both players are ready they reveal their bids at the same time. The player who bid the most goes first. Roll off for ties. Any command points bid are lost, even if you didn't win initiative.

The blind bid thing? Cool
The additional command points for less power/points? No

This still creates the issue in that a person with 6 Total CP and a person with 12 Total CP, the person with 12 can just bid 6 (or 7?) to always win.

Call me crazy, but I'm sure there was a rumour before 8th came out that you would make a blind bid with command points for first turn.
As mentioned above, I think that system would be much better than the current one.

This still creates the issue in that a person with 6 Total CP and a person with 12 Total CP, the person with 12 can just bid 6 (or 7?) to always win.

Well yes they could, but if the opposing player suspected that his opponent would do this, then he could just bid 0 and eliminate half of his opponents command points in one fell swoop!

It would create some cool mind games in my opinion.

 Talamare wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
What I would actually enjoy is a system used in some other games. Get any token to represent command points. They have to be small enough to fit a bunch in your hand.

If one players army is made up of less power or points they gain 1 additional command point.

The player with the least amount of units gains an additional command point.

Each player bids a number of their points by putting them in their hand and concealing the rest of their pile. When both players are ready they reveal their bids at the same time. The player who bid the most goes first. Roll off for ties. Any command points bid are lost, even if you didn't win initiative.

The blind bid thing? Cool
The additional command points for less power/points? No

This still creates the issue in that a person with 6 Total CP and a person with 12 Total CP, the person with 12 can just bid 6 (or 7?) to always win.

Which is fine?

A person with 12 who bids 6 to guarantee they win goes first but now lost half their benefits from the way they built their list just so they have first activation. If that is worth 6 CP to you then good. You deserve it. The player with 6 could bid zero. Walking into the game with equivalent points.

We played a custom scenario for my first game of 8th. We decided to D6 roll off to see who went first - but we allowed you to secretly declare any number of CP you'd use to add to this dice roll.

We were playing a small-ish game, so we only had maybe 3-6 a piece. You just hid a die behind a piece of terrain with the number of CP's you'd use to get initiative. Simple, and it worked well.

However it was for one scenario, and the people I play with aren't douche-bags enough to build an army to abuse that idea (it was also spur of the moment scenario, so it was not as if you could plan ahead for it).

remove seize the initiaive all together. Set up armies without knowing who's going first. Dice off - winner choses who goes first. If you go first - your reserves don't come into until turn 2.

I feel like this would be the best and most fair situation possible in an I go you go system.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Talamare wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
What I would actually enjoy is a system used in some other games. Get any token to represent command points. They have to be small enough to fit a bunch in your hand.

If one players army is made up of less power or points they gain 1 additional command point.

The player with the least amount of units gains an additional command point.

Each player bids a number of their points by putting them in their hand and concealing the rest of their pile. When both players are ready they reveal their bids at the same time. The player who bid the most goes first. Roll off for ties. Any command points bid are lost, even if you didn't win initiative.

The blind bid thing? Cool
The additional command points for less power/points? No

This still creates the issue in that a person with 6 Total CP and a person with 12 Total CP, the person with 12 can just bid 6 (or 7?) to always win.

Which is fine?

A person with 12 who bids 6 to guarantee they win goes first but now lost half their benefits from the way they built their list just so they have first activation. If that is worth 6 CP to you then good. You deserve it. The player with 6 could bid zero. Walking into the game with equivalent points.

No it's not fine. The problem is the fact that the player is still guarenteed to be going first in a game where first turn advantage is massive and almost game winning on its own. Especially since you know this at the list building and revealing phase you can tailor you army to abuse your guaranteed first turn to pretty much win the game outright.

I'd glady spend half my command points to basically win the game

Okay, how about this: Make it easy.
It costs one CP to seize the initiative on a 6+, two CPs to seize on a 5+, and three CPs to seize on a 4+. You can still spend one CP to re-roll.

So, at most, you'll spend 7 CPs for a 75% chance of taking first turn. If you're a large MSU army, you start with many more CPs, so this allows you to risk most of your points in exchange for a good (but not guaranteed) chance of getting turn 1, but that'll mean you no longer have a points advantage.

Thoughts?

 Xenomancers wrote:
remove seize the initiaive all together. Set up armies without knowing who's going first. Dice off - winner choses who goes first. If you go first - your reserves don't come into until turn 2.

I feel like this would be the best and most fair situation possible in an I go you go system.

^^^This is the best solution.

But if you really, really wanted a "seize the initiative" rule after this, make it a stratagem that costs 2-3CPs for a 5+ roll that cannot be re-rolled
But even if you Seize, your reserves don't come in.

-

Rather than trying to find different ways of picking the first turn, are there ways we could make going first less overpowering?

 argonak wrote:
Rather than trying to find different ways of picking the first turn, are there ways we could make going first less overpowering?

Yeah. A entirely different turn structure with alternating unit activation.

I mean... This is the actual problem. It requires a much more drastic solution. Which im all for btw.

 argonak wrote:
Rather than trying to find different ways of picking the first turn, are there ways we could make going first less overpowering?

There are ways

1 - 1st player on 1st turn may NOT bring in reserves
2 - 2nd player starts with +1 CP, gained the moment the 1st player finishes deploying units.
3 - Steal the Initiative removed.

New Strategems that may only be used at the start of 1st player if you're going second.
1 CP - Steal the Initiative - This must be the first Strategem you use during this phase. On roll of 6, you steal the Initiative and go first. You may NOT bring in units from reserves. You may not use this if the initiative was stolen from you this battle.
1 CP - Dust Cloud - Opponent suffers -1 to all Hit Rolls this turn
1 CP - Eager for Battle - Your units are immune to morale checks this turn.
1 CP - Go to Ground - Your units gain a 5+ FNP this turn.
1 CP - Muddy Terrain - Reduce your opponents Movement and Charges by 2"
1 CP - Disturbance in the Warp - -2 to all Psychic Tests
2 CP - Galeforce Winds - Opponent models can't use the Fly advantage this round. If a model with Fly has a minimum movement, it must move it's minimal distant and cannot shoot.

You may not spend more than 2 CP during this phase.


So scenario

How about this as an alternative to seize the initiative:

Seize the Initiative!

Cost: 3 CPs

This stratagem may only be used after both sides have deployed but prior to the first turn and only by the player going second. The player selects D6 units that may make move (including advancing), psychic, and shoot actions as if it was that players turn. The units must remain 9" from all enemy units and may not charge. Units with the TITANIC keyword or units in reserve may not be selected. A transport with units embarked may only move if all units aboard are selected as well.

Personally I'd rather see a roll-off with finishing first giving a +1 to the roll. Don't make it look like you should go first and then yoink it out from under you with a single die roll, and don't let people burn huge quantities of Command Points and automatically get it, just be up-front and straightforward about it. Make the roll, get over it, and move on.

 Xenomancers wrote:
remove seize the initiaive all together. Set up armies without knowing who's going first. Dice off - winner choses who goes first. If you go first - your reserves don't come into until turn 2.

I feel like this would be the best and most fair situation possible in an I go you go system.

Best Idea yet, that would fix a but ton of problems in the Alpha Strike meta. Are you a Old GW sleeper agent? Seems to good to be true.

Most tournaments have gone to dice off with a +1 for whoever finished deploying first.

My brother and I have been considering how to adjust the game to avoid the first turn being so OP since its so clear that getting first turn is a major advantage.

We noticed that its shooty lists who benefit the most from this since lets say you are Tau with no close combat to speak of, everything you own is a strong shooter with good range. This means that if you get first turn then your whole entire army gets to do their maximum damage before the opponent gets to do anything. This can easily mean that about a quarter or a third of the opponents force (and likely the most important part) gets taken out before he even started to play which is really OP.

Close combat armies aren't as OP when getting first turn as few things will be able to reach the opponent on first turn so the opponent should have a mostly intact army when he gets his first turn.

We thus decided to try out that whoever gets first turn gets a -1 to hit on shooting attacks (maybe auto hitting attacks like flamers get reduced by 1 with a minimum of 1 hit)

This avoids the game getting more complicated with elaborate stratagems or CP shenanigans and avoids the balancing issues involved in basing the strategies on CP since not all armies have the same access to CP lists.

it gives a clear and simple minor nerf to whoever starts without making it so bad that people won't want to take first turn.

Feels pretty good, what do you think dakka

 fartherthanfar wrote:
My brother and I have been considering how to adjust the game to avoid the first turn being so OP since its so clear that getting first turn is a major advantage.

We noticed that its shooty lists who benefit the most from this since lets say you are Tau with no close combat to speak of, everything you own is a strong shooter with good range. This means that if you get first turn then your whole entire army gets to do their maximum damage before the opponent gets to do anything. This can easily mean that about a quarter or a third of the opponents force (and likely the most important part) gets taken out before he even started to play which is really OP.

Close combat armies aren't as OP when getting first turn as few things will be able to reach the opponent on first turn so the opponent should have a mostly intact army when he gets his first turn.

We thus decided to try out that whoever gets first turn gets a -1 to hit on shooting attacks (maybe auto hitting attacks like flamers get reduced by 1 with a minimum of 1 hit)

This avoids the game getting more complicated with elaborate stratagems or CP shenanigans and avoids the balancing issues involved in basing the strategies on CP since not all armies have the same access to CP lists.

it gives a clear and simple minor nerf to whoever starts without making it so bad that people won't want to take first turn.

Feels pretty good, what do you think dakka

-1 to hit punishes some armies more severely than others

Especially if stacked with a 2nd -1 to hit from certain sources.

You're better off giving the receiving player a 5+++ FNP
or to be maximally balanced... Anyone without a natural 2+ Save gets a 5+++ FNP

Why?
3+ Save = 1 / (2/6) = 3 EHP
3+ with 5+++ = (1 / (2/6)) / (4/6) = 4.5 EHP

2+ Save = 1 / (1/6) = 6 EHP
2+ Save with 5+++ = (1 / (1/6)) / (4/6) = 9 EHP

yes a -1 to hit would punish shooter lists more than non-shooter lists but that is a calculated choice though since shooter lists are the ones that benefits the most from getting first turn.

giving a 5++ or 5+++ would potentially not do the job if the person who gets second turn already has an army with a 5++ or 5+++.

Im trying to calibrate this first turn nerf against shooters more than just give the second turn guy a benefit which could possibly not even work for you if you happen to have a list that already has a the buff.

 fartherthanfar wrote:
yes a -1 to hit would punish shooter lists more than non-shooter lists but that is a calculated choice though since shooter lists are the ones that benefits the most from getting first turn.

He's not talking 'Shooters vs Non-shooters', he's talking 'Space Marine shooters vs Ork shooters'. Orks hit on a 5+. With a flat -1, we'd be practically unable to hurt many enemies and literally unable to hurt fliers or stealthy units.

giving a 5++ or 5+++ would potentially not do the job if the person who gets second turn already has an army with a 5++ or 5+++.

Im trying to calibrate this first turn nerf against shooters more than just give the second turn guy a benefit which could possibly not even work for you if you happen to have a list that already has a the buff.

You do know that FNP stacks, right? Universal 5+++ would help anyone, from Ork Boys to Death Guard.

yeah, I suppose a 5+++ which would stack on top of everything could be good and would even help against the first turn chargers which there is a few of in 8th.

I guess I just find that if feels better for units to hit less accurately if they just arrived on the battlefield and rushed to attack quickly instead of the opponent being tougher