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.

I don't really care for overwatch as it exists.

1. It's usually a bunch of dice rolling for little or no benefit.
2. If one player actually manages to get lucky and do something that matters with his overwatch, the other player likely won't feel great about it.
3. It makes life harder on melee armies that are often playing on hard mode as it is. There's only so much you can do to mitigate overwatch. You can make the right plays and end up losing models to overwatch just because.
4. Overwatch made more sense in editions where models closest to the shooter were removed first. This made overwatch a bit more important because killing the closest couple of enemy models might make the charge harder to pull off. That isn't the case now that we can remove models in whatever order we want.

So with that in mind, what if we made overwatch more powerful but also a stratagem? Something along the lines of...

OVERWATCH (2CP)
Use this stratagem during the enemy charge phase when the enemy unit makes a successful charge roll but before any models in the charging unit are moved. Select a friendly target of the charge that is not within 6" of an enemy model. That unit may immediately shoot at the charging unit as though it were the shooting phase. The shooting attacks hit on a 5+ regardless of modifiers.

The intended benefits:
1. You aren't wasting time rolling with every unit that gets charged every turn.
2. The overwatch you do fire is going to be more likely to actually hurt something. Instead of hurting things just because, you made an intentional decision to spend resources to do damage where it matters.

For units that have rules that improve overwatch, you could either just change those rules to something like, "Models with this rule add 1 to to-hit rolls made when using the Overwatch stratagem." Or alternatively you could create (cheaper?) stratagems that are available to the relevant units that are basically the same as Overwatch. So a Mordian Stratagem or a Craftworlders stratagem that only works for Dire Avengers would basically give you an extra (cheaper?) overwatch every turn.

And "flamer" weapons can just gain a special rule that basically lets them overwatch as per usual without needing to use a stratagem.

Overwatch is fine as is. The issue is the Fall Back mechanic on top of Fly being too strong for shooting units.

This would be a waste of 2 Command Points in 99% of cases.

Consider that many armies have a Strategem that allows them to shoot twice, and in those cases, it almost universally costs 2 Command Points and comes with no restriction on Ballistic Skill or targeting.

This proposed strategem, meanwhile, is vulnerable to the same things as normal overwatch, (Charging in a chaff unit to block overwatch to the critical targets,) has a bizarrely large bubble where it can't be used (Anything within 6"? That's more than half the charges I try to make), and with a 5+ to hit is only slightly more powerful than regular overwatch to begin with.

Also, you would kneecap any army that has buffed overwatch as its entire gimmick. Tau Sept may as well not exist, or Tau in general. Having to spend 3-4 Command Points in the charge phase in order to get to use your army's gimmick is not remotely worth it. (Remember that Strategems are one-per-phase, so if you've got a whole army built around buffing one Strategem, it's a terrible army, and if you've got an army built around using several strategems, it's still a terrible army because nobody wants to save a third or more of their Command Points to get a moderate defensive ability for one phase.)


If you do want to make Overwatch into a strategem, then we have a couple options.

A: Make it fire at full Ballistic Skill, cost only one Command Point, and be useable multiple times per phase (There's no precedent for reusable strategems, but it'd be pretty much mandatory). Armies or factions which have boosted Overwatch instead get the Command Point refunded on a 4+.

B: Make it fire at a 5+ and cost two Command Points, but be armywide. If a single model wants to fire overwatch, then it costs one command point instead of two. Armies or factions which have boosted overwatch can overwatch with one unit for free, or with their whole army for 1 Command Point.

For Tau, regardless of which idea is being used, their supporting fire works as it does now - If you're within 6" of a friendly unit that gets charged, you can use Supporting Fire to hit them on 6s, useable once per unit per phase. (Tau Sept would also hit on 6s, because their ability would be the CP cost reduction/refund.)

If overwatch is going to be changed it should be nerfed, not improved. Firing at full BS for just 1 CP and with no limitations would be insane. Many shooty armies have tons of CPs available. Make it 3 CP at least, and one use per turn only, since firing twice in your turn is 2 CP.

Leave overwatch as it is or remove it completely. I never liked any mechanics that allow players to fire in the opponent's turn.

Overwatch is fine - the issue is allowing fall back without a free strike.

 Blackie wrote:
If overwatch is going to be changed it should be nerfed, not improved. Firing at full BS for just 1 CP and with no limitations would be insane. Many shooty armies have tons of CPs available. Make it 3 CP at least, and one use per turn only, since firing twice in your turn is 2 CP.

Leave overwatch as it is or remove it completely. I never liked any mechanics that allow players to fire in the opponent's turn.

Why is firing Overwatch more valuable to you than firing twice?
When I fire twice, it's at a deliberate choice at an enemy unit who I specifically want to damage.
When I fire overwatch, even if it's with an autohitting weapon, it's a hail mary that usually isn't optimal for what I'm shooting at but I'd like to get the shots off anyways.

"3CP at least" sounds like you just don't want overwatch to be viable in any context.

I play melee armies. My three big armies are Orks, Wolves, and Bloody Rose Sisters of Battle. I know about charging. I regularly absorb 5-6 Overwatches in a single phase, and that's if I *didn't* get everything into punching distance all at once.
If I can force my opponent to lose 6+ Command Points firing at nonoptimal targets, that's fantastic in my book.

(Also, you'd still be able to screen out or otherwise avoid overwatch by charging with chaff. Rhinos or Trukks are a great way to soak up bolter or lasgun fire so your Blood Claws or Boyz don't have to.)

I said firing overwatch with full BS, not flat overwatch. It's actually like shooting twice. Even stronger IMHO since a good shooty unit can obliterate or cripple a unit that is going to assault it so badly that is basically immune to melee specialists.

If the opponent spends 6+ CPs to fire at full BS in my turn and he's an imperium dude with 18+ CPs that's fantastic for him, not for me. You're also not forcing anyone, if the opponent assumes that spending that CP for overwatching doesn't make any difference, why on earth should he invest that CP anyway?

Transports like rhinos or trukks can definitely eat overwatch but rinhos are just a pure tax in many armies, including SW and trukks match better with shooty units you don't want into combat, barring a unit of nobz which you may probably want into a bonebreaka.

I still think they should have incorporated a 'caught in the crossfire' rule when units fall back out of combat.

Firstly you cannot fall back in the direction of an enemy unit (even if the enemy unit is tied in combat)

Secondly if there is an enemy unit that is not in combat within 6 inches of a unit that wants to fall back, the unit also cannot fall back unless it allows the free unit to have a free round of shooting against it (this is a good balance between the older rules that would just destroy the unit), this shooting attack is resolved before morale losses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'd then add a flashbang grenade mechanic that assault troops could use instead of shooting, if successful it would make the enemy re-roll successful overwatch hits.

Only certain units in each army would get this rule/equivilant such as marine assault squads and vanguard vets, but not tacticals, terminators, intercessors etc etc and it would only work against the assault marines, no other unit also charging. It may not make sense fluff wise for it not to work for other units charging the same target if the assault squad fails the charge, but this balances it out in some way also for the overwatching unit as they can be lucky and the assault squad fails the charge.

I think overwatch is fine as is personally. I do not like the changes personally.

Discussion of falling back is cool and currently happening in this thread:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/768206.page

I feel I may be missing some crucial connection between falling back and overwatch, however. My intent was not to state that overwatch is too powerful or that overwatching, falling back, and then overwatching again is typically a problem.

My issue with overwatch is mostly that it usually boils down to lots of dice rolling for very little effect, and when it does accomplish something, the charger feels as though they're losing models to "free" shooting.

Thus why my goal isn't to "nerf" overwatch so much as it is to get rid of unnecessary and often pointless overwatch while making the remaining overwatch potent enough to matter. Plus, slapping a CP cost on that "free" shooting makes it no longer feel free.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:
This would be a waste of 2 Command Points in 99% of cases.

Consider that many armies have a Strategem that allows them to shoot twice, and in those cases, it almost universally costs 2 Command Points and comes with no restriction on Ballistic Skill or targeting.

This proposed strategem, meanwhile, is vulnerable to the same things as normal overwatch, (Charging in a chaff unit to block overwatch to the critical targets,) has a bizarrely large bubble where it can't be used (Anything within 6"? That's more than half the charges I try to make), and with a 5+ to hit is only slightly more powerful than regular overwatch to begin with.

Also, you would kneecap any army that has buffed overwatch as its entire gimmick. Tau Sept may as well not exist, or Tau in general. Having to spend 3-4 Command Points in the charge phase in order to get to use your army's gimmick is not remotely worth it. (Remember that Strategems are one-per-phase, so if you've got a whole army built around buffing one Strategem, it's a terrible army, and if you've got an army built around using several strategems, it's still a terrible army because nobody wants to save a third or more of their Command Points to get a moderate defensive ability for one phase.)


If you do want to make Overwatch into a strategem, then we have a couple options.

A: Make it fire at full Ballistic Skill, cost only one Command Point, and be useable multiple times per phase (There's no precedent for reusable strategems, but it'd be pretty much mandatory). Armies or factions which have boosted Overwatch instead get the Command Point refunded on a 4+.

B: Make it fire at a 5+ and cost two Command Points, but be armywide. If a single model wants to fire overwatch, then it costs one command point instead of two. Armies or factions which have boosted overwatch can overwatch with one unit for free, or with their whole army for 1 Command Point.

For Tau, regardless of which idea is being used, their supporting fire works as it does now - If you're within 6" of a friendly unit that gets charged, you can use Supporting Fire to hit them on 6s, useable once per unit per phase. (Tau Sept would also hit on 6s, because their ability would be the CP cost reduction/refund.)

You make good points. Your Option B strikes me as a half-measure that pleases no one. Overwatch would feel like it costs something, which is good if you're on the receiving end of an especially deadly overwatch, but it would still result in a bunch of dice rolling that would have minimal impact. Option A strikes me a more useful change because the resulting overwatch would actually get something done. However, I disagree with several of the specifics. Firing at full ballistics skill on your opponent's turn would actually introduce some new advantages to the overwatcher that might be problematic. A squad of meltaguns (fire dragons), for instance, would be semi-unchargeable by most vehicles because the overwatch would be so hazardous. Squads of hormagaunts or ork boyz trying to charge a blob of guardsmen or guardians would basically be handing their target a free shooting phase. Where a unit can normally expect to move forward and charge with only the normally-unintimidating power of an overwatch to stop him, full BS overwatch would suddenly make it possible for some units to basically negate the charge or else make it significantly less appealing as a tactic. Making the stratagem usable multiple times per phase would compound the issue.

Perhaps some combination of the following changes to my original proposal would strike a better balance?
* Make the Overwatch stratagem cost 1CP instead of 2CP.
* Specify that Supporting Fire is still a thing and that it basically works the same way that it does now. You'd just have to reword it to not use the term "overwatch" or something.
* Consider replacing rules that allow Overwatch to hit on a 5+ with supporting fire. That way, things like Mordians and Dire Avengers would not only still be better at shooting incoming chargers than their peers, but they'd also be able to proactively utilize that ability instead of relying on their opponent to declare units as charge targets to do so.

I actually don't mind the existing overwatch rules on things like Mordians because the ability to overwatch (that well) takes up a resource (their regiment tactics) and also tends to be impactful to the game rather than a lot of sound and fury signifiying one or two dead chargers. Again, my main intentions are to cut down on useless rolling, to make overwatch no longer feel "free", and to make the remaining overwatch feel more impactful.

As a T'au player I don't like overwatch because it goes too far to prevent the fight phase from happening at all, or is wasted time rolling. I've hit too many daemon princes in overwatch with a fusion or two. And then walked away to shoot back.

I can see the merit of wanting to emulate pinning fire or getting mowed down while making charges through open areas but the current rules don't do too much of that.

What if specific weapons did overwatch? Flamers and machine gun types seem appropriate at least, the kind that are theoretically constantly firing or aren't limited in rate too heavily. It would give me incentive to bring burst cannons sprinkled in the army and Imperium players reason to have flamers and assault cannons. It always seemed odd to me that any weapon could be shot at two or three times the normal rate with overwatch.

Shas'O'Ceris wrote:
As a T'au player I don't like overwatch because it goes too far to prevent the fight phase from happening at all, or is wasted time rolling. I've hit too many daemon princes in overwatch with a fusion or two. And then walked away to shoot back.

I can see the merit of wanting to emulate pinning fire or getting mowed down while making charges through open areas but the current rules don't do too much of that.

What if specific weapons did overwatch? Flamers and machine gun types seem appropriate at least, the kind that are theoretically constantly firing or aren't limited in rate too heavily. It would give me incentive to bring burst cannons sprinkled in the army and Imperium players reason to have flamers and assault cannons. It always seemed odd to me that any weapon could be shot at two or three times the normal rate with overwatch.

I like that idea a lot. Rather than fiddling with stratagem costs, you just make it a special rule on weapons that would reasonably have it. It encourages you to take weapons that might not be as popular (especially in the knight-centric meta). My dark lance ravager would no longer get lucky and kill a charging Old One Eye thus taking the wind out of my opponent's sails. Because the general concept of overwatching would still exist, you could basically just make overwatch (be it a 5+ or 6+ version" the chapter tactic for things like Mordians. Things like Dire Avengers with their Defensive Tactics rule could just have the Overwatch rule on weapons they carry. Overwatchings could be an ability unlocked by a Tau suit system.

It would get rid of most of the annoying, unnecessary rolling while also giving more character to certain weapons. When you have two high RoF weapons with similar niches (thinking assault cannon versus heavy bolter or scatter laser versus shuriken cannon), then you could give Overwatch to the less popular of those weapons to give it a purpose.

Good suggestion is good.

Overwatch should be made into a tactical choice, but not a CP one. The cost should be exchanging shooting on your turn to set up to potentially shoot on the enemies. Something like shooting at full BS but half range. You can designate units to go on overwatch on your turn instead of shooting and thus help protect other units.... you know. Like overwatch.

CP however is a limited currency. Actual tactical choices shouldnt be reliant on it.

Absolutely not. This returns to the usual square peg in a round hole issue with people wanting to run melee-only armies in 40K, and expecting there to be some kind of vague balance. There isn't, and honestly shouldn't be.

 Elbows wrote:
Absolutely not. This returns to the usual square peg in a round hole issue with people wanting to run melee-only armies in 40K, and expecting there to be some kind of vague balance. There isn't, and honestly shouldn't be.

No, but assault oriented armies should be 50/50 melee and shooting at least, if not more in favor of melee.

I'd be in favor of removing overwatch and allowing it as a stratagem. For 1 CP the unit that gets charged fires overwatch hitting on 6s as usual. But it costs 1 CP and one use only per turn. 3 CPs for firing at full BS.

I don't want melee-only armies as well but shooting has become insane for many factions and should be definitely toned down a lot. If part of the process involves nerfing overwatch I wouldn't complain about that.

 Elbows wrote:
Absolutely not. This returns to the usual square peg in a round hole issue with people wanting to run melee-only armies in 40K, and expecting there to be some kind of vague balance. There isn't, and honestly shouldn't be.

If GW didn't want melee centric armies to be viable, they probably should stop supplying them and promoting them in the fluff.

Overwatch doesn't need a buff, melee armies are already worse than shooty by a margin.

 Lance845 wrote:
Overwatch should be made into a tactical choice, but not a CP one. The cost should be exchanging shooting on your turn to set up to potentially shoot on the enemies. Something like shooting at full BS but half range. You can designate units to go on overwatch on your turn instead of shooting and thus help protect other units.... you know. Like overwatch.

CP however is a limited currency. Actual tactical choices shouldnt be reliant on it.

And then it never becomes a choice until the last two units are on the table and nothing happens, just like in 2nd.

Bad idea then, bad idea now.