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.

Thanks to the IGOUGO system, first turn is hugely important in 40k, for some armies more than others, and it really sucks if you're playing as or against one of those armies and end up losing the roll-off. I'm now at a huge disadvantage, maybe even lost the game outright, before the game even started with a roll that was completely out of my control. It feels really bad!

To solve this, I think a Star Wars:Legion style "bidding" system can work. For those who haven't played Legion, the player with the lowest points value for their army gets better control over what the mission should be, and the players call this "bidding" (e.g. starting with 20 points under the max would be a 20 point bid). I would make it so that the player with the lowest points value (or power level, if you're using power level I guess) in 40k gets to determine who goes first. Three advantages of this:

1. More interesting list building. Right now in 40k there's just no reason not spam random extra models or upgrades in order to get yourself to the max points limit, but this system would make it a more interesting decision: is it really worth giving up potential control of first turn in order to get a couple extra marines with plasma or another squad of grots?

2. Players have better control over who goes first, rather than leaving up to the dice gods, which feels a lot better.

3. First turn is now as not as big of an advantage, as the player who gets first turn likely has a smaller army.

What do you guys think? To me this is a rules change that basically has no downsides, but maybe I've missed something.

1. At the same time it makes smaller investments like the odd pistol or power weapon here and there less likely to show up. "A couple Marines with plasma" is not what I would classify as a "points filler". Since upgrades are mostly free for them, we are talking about whole squads instead of single plasma guns. I don't see the benefit of people purposefully showing up with 1800 points to a 2000 points game.

2. Unless you know exactly how much points your opponent will bring, you do not have any agency about who goes first at all. This can only work if you play against the same people with the same lists regularely. Unless you undershoot by a lot just to make sure to get the first turn (but it is still not guaranteed).

3. Agreed.

4. How do you plan to settle a tie?

5. The ruling does benefit shooty lists more than melee ones.

6. Your core problem is either lethality OR lethality coupled with IGOUGO. The game would be better as a whole, if you'd tackle those problems. Then people could bring 2000 points to a 2000 point game.

Mangoblin wrote:
Thanks to the IGOUGO system,

Think you found half of 40k's problem but not th3 solution

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Mangoblin wrote:
Thanks to the IGOUGO system,

Think you found half of 40k's problem but not th3 solution

Yeah, I feel like the OP's proposal has the potential to be a bandaid on the problem, but not a cure. And there are downsides to the proposal that would make me hesitate to use it. Ideally, the player at a disadvantage wins first turn and thus the game is more even. But what if the player with the better alpha strike goes first by simply not taking one of the extra units they didn't particularly need anyway? Then the alpha striker is hitting at nearly 100% of their usual offense, but they get to go first automatically. And even worse, it's possible that both players will play at lower points to try and go first, and the player with the stronger alpha strike still goes first. So now the alpha striker is still going first, but there also isn't much of a difference in points because their opponent left points unspent in an attempt to go first.

Short of an overhaul to the turn structure, I think the most realistic approach for making alpha strikes less of an issue is to go through and tone down the lethality of various weapons/units. That way, even if one player does get off an alpha strike, they're not removing as big a percentage of the enemy army from the table.

EDIT: And modify or remove things like Doctrines/Strands of Fate too.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Mangoblin wrote:
Thanks to the IGOUGO system,

Think you found half of 40k's problem but not th3 solution

If games workshop ever gets rid of IGOUGO I will eat my shoe and stream it on twitch

I despise bidding for priority. It wildly disincentivizes me from playing Legion.

No. It just leads to more gamey crap.

If you can't write a list to match the points value of a game? Write a better list.

NO.

This would be horribly abused.

X-wing used to do this, and dropped it almost immediately on being switched to a more competent design team.