Latest posts for the thread "6th and what not"

6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

So, I see random charge distances. Didn't think they would find a way to dumb the game down even more.

Thoughts?

Re:6th and what not

Kaldor — GMT

Look, dice and luck are a crucial element of the game. You can set up the greatest charge in the world, with a ten-man Paladin deathstar, complete with attached Librarian, Grandmaster with Rad Grenades and Psychotroke grenades, and theoretically you can still fluff your rolls and be wiped out by a ten man Conscript squad.

Luck is inherent in the system, all we are doing is debating how much impact it should have.

IMO, adding another layer of luck (over the top of the possibility of fluffing your dice in combat) to the mix is a good thing. It encourages players to more carefully consider the way they deploy and allocate their troops. It adds more to the question "is X in assault range of Y" than a simple yes/no answer, and requires you to act accordingly.

6th and what not

Psienesis — GMT

I don't see this as dumbing the game down at all, rather the opposite in fact.

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Your are simply wrong. It doesnt force you to be more careful; why be careful when in the end, its about luck?

Your example only proves yourself wrong lol. I'll let you figure that one out.

Re:6th and what not

Kaldor — GMT

Negator80 wrote:why be careful when in the end, its about luck?

Um, because you need to hedge your bets and stack the odds if you want to win?

6th and what not

sniperjolly — GMT

Here is a very simple reason they added random charge distance.

Pre-measuring.

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:why be careful when in the end, its about luck?

Um, because you need to hedge your bets and stack the odds if you want to win?

So youre saying 'get within 2 inches before declaring a charge'?

You're also saying 'its ok that i dont need as much skill'.

6th and what not

LunaHound — GMT

I understand your point OP.

e.g before we allow a certain margin of distance to be considered when gauging a distance, so be it.

But to do anymore, and making it MORE about luck? Might as well as roll 1-3 i win 4-6 you win.

Its almost like GW is trying to give 9 year old SM players a better chance to win.

Re:6th and what not

Kaldor — GMT

Negator80 wrote:
Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:why be careful when in the end, its about luck?

Um, because you need to hedge your bets and stack the odds if you want to win?

So youre saying 'get within 2 inches before declaring a charge'?

You're also saying 'its ok that i dont need as much skill'.

Uh, no.

Really, I don't understand your problem here. There is a potential to fail a charge due to bad luck. Good players will account for this, and win more often. Bad players will not, and they will lose more often.

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:
Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:why be careful when in the end, its about luck?

Um, because you need to hedge your bets and stack the odds if you want to win?

So youre saying 'get within 2 inches before declaring a charge'?

You're also saying 'its ok that i dont need as much skill'.

Uh, no.

Really, I don't understand your problem here. There is a potential to fail a charge due to bad luck. Good players will account for this, and win more often. Bad players will not, and they will lose more often.

Good players will be more lucky?

In the past, a good player could just 'be good'. Now its 'be good' and you still might fail.

6th and what not

doctorludo — GMT

Conversely, I never understood why being bad at guessing distances should make my army less effective in a tabletop strategy game.

6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

doctorludo wrote:Conversely, I never understood why being bad at guessing distances should make my army less effective in a tabletop strategy game.

Then you should understand that if my squad leader told me to sprint 100 meters to cover where it was actually 200 meters while under fire, he would be a bad squad leader. And for the same reason, youd be a bad wargamer.

6th and what not

Baronyu — GMT

If they simply wanna add a tactical element to assault, then overwatch alone should be fine: "should I charge at a full size gunner unit and lose about 1-4(depends on your unit) on the charge? or should I wait?"

2D6" doesn't make things more tactical: for more durable assault units, this is fine, nothing has changed, they have gained the chance to do 5th ed fleet distance(12"), while still retaining the ability to shoot; for less durable units, this means their safe assault distance has dropped, so they'll have to get closer than in 5th ed before declaring a charge. And then things will stay this way until the next edition, that's not a fun tactical element, that's just a tactical shift from 5th to 6th.

And if "randomness is fun and tactical", why didn't shooting get the same treatment? Shooting, with pre-measuring, is now literally "is X in shooting range? Y/N". There can be millions of ways to explain why a gun would fail to hit a target at its maximum effective range, just as there can be ways to explain how my super fast wych unit has just moved 2".

It's the banana skin, it's always the god damn banana skin.

Re:6th and what not

Kaldor — GMT

Negator80 wrote:Good players will be more lucky?

Oh yeah, that's exactly what I said.

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Oh and this is a clear buff to marines.

Oh yeah, that's exactly what I said.

it is exactly what you said. You even explained it. 'stack the odds'=better chance at getting lucky. However, the options you have to stack those odds are quite limited.

6th and what not

Baronyu — GMT

doctorludo wrote:Conversely, I never understood why being bad at guessing distances should make my army less effective in a tabletop strategy game.

Because distance-judgment is a skill you could acquire should you try to(it's also an useful life skill beyond the means of tabletop wargame), random dice roll isn't a skill unless you "convert" your own dice.

For example, I had terrible judgment of distance when I 1st started playing, but I'm slowly getting better at it. However, I could train like a kung fu master, and I could still fail my 4+ dodge save.

6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Baronyu wrote:
doctorludo wrote:Conversely, I never understood why being bad at guessing distances should make my army less effective in a tabletop strategy game.

Because distance-judgment is a skill you could acquire should you try to(it's also an useful life skill beyond the means of tabletop wargame), random dice roll isn't a skill unless you "convert" your own dice.

For example, I had terrible judgment of distance when I 1st started playing, but I'm slowly getting better at it. However, I could train like a kung fu master, and I could still fail my 4+ dodge save.

And thats exactly why the OP is right.

Re:6th and what not

Kaldor — GMT

Negator80 wrote:Oh and this is a clear buff to marines.

Oh yeah, that's exactly what I said.

it is exactly what you said. You even explained it. 'stack the odds'=better chance at getting lucky. However, the options you have to stack those odds are quite limited.

I don't think luck works the way you think it does.

If there's a 50% chance of failure, a good player will commit two units to the task, halving his rate of failure.

With the same luck, a good player is now twice as likely to succeed.

The way you're saying it, I should be able to charge some Grots into a Paladin Deathstar and expect to destroy it because hey, it's all just luck, right?

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Ah right. There's a little bit of logic finally. from here, the argument is simply: this is too random and stupid.

And everyone runs around with 4T and a 3+ save too right? Nevermind all those xenos races that wont be able to weather the return fire.

Re:6th and what not

Kaldor — GMT

Negator80 wrote:Ah right. There's a little bit of logic finally. from here, the argument is simply: this is too random and stupid.

And everyone runs around with 4T and a 3+ save too right? Nevermind all those xenos races that wont be able to weather the return fire.

You know what, I give up. I have no idea what you're even talking about, and I strongly suspect it's because you have no idea what you're talking about.

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:Ah right. There's a little bit of logic finally. from here, the argument is simply: this is too random and stupid.

And everyone runs around with 4T and a 3+ save too right? Nevermind all those xenos races that wont be able to weather the return fire.

You know what, I give up. I have no idea what you're even talking about, and I strongly suspect it's because you have no idea what you're talking about.

Random charge distance is stupid for a billion reasons.

6th and what not

chaos0xomega — GMT

While the argument can be made (poorly) that its dumbing down the game, if you paid any attention at all to other changes (wound allocation and cover for instance) you would realize that the game requires far more skill to play effectively.

6th and what not

doctorludo — GMT

Negator80 wrote:
doctorludo wrote:Conversely, I never understood why being bad at guessing distances should make my army less effective in a tabletop strategy game.

Then you should understand that if my squad leader told me to sprint 100 meters to cover where it was actually 200 meters while under fire, he would be a bad squad leader. And for the same reason, youd be a bad wargamer.

But this isn't real life. It's a strategy game. There are plenty of other real-life skills that are translated into dice rolls in 40K. Accuracy, combat ability and strength, for instance. So rolling distance is a way of incorporating various random aspects of battle into an assault. As the leader, you have a chance to decide whether to charge a closer unit, with a higher chance of success.

In reality, I think the real reason it's been changed is that it's a common way people can cheat.

6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

doctorludo wrote:
Negator80 wrote:
doctorludo wrote:Conversely, I never understood why being bad at guessing distances should make my army less effective in a tabletop strategy game.

Then you should understand that if my squad leader told me to sprint 100 meters to cover where it was actually 200 meters while under fire, he would be a bad squad leader. And for the same reason, youd be a bad wargamer.

But this isn't real life. It's a strategy game. There are plenty of other real-life skills that are translated into dice rolls in 40K. Accuracy, combat ability and strength, for instance. So rolling distance is a way of incorporating various random aspects of battle into an assault. As the leader, you have a chance to decide whether to charge a closer unit, with a higher chance of success.

In reality, I think the real reason it's been changed is that it's a common way people can cheat.

Sounds good on paper, but highly impractical.

Also, i pride myself in playing well. I dont pride myself in rolling dice well. Which are you?

Re:6th and what not

Baronyu — GMT

Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:Oh and this is a clear buff to marines.

Oh yeah, that's exactly what I said.

it is exactly what you said. You even explained it. 'stack the odds'=better chance at getting lucky. However, the options you have to stack those odds are quite limited.

I don't think luck works the way you think it does.

If there's a 50% chance of failure, a good player will commit two units to the task, halving his rate of failure.

With the same luck, a good player is now twice as likely to succeed.

The way you're saying it, I should be able to charge some Grots into a Paladin Deathstar and expect to destroy it because hey, it's all just luck, right?

Eh.... hmm... First of all, luck is not a quantitive value, you cannot have the "same" luck, this isn't a video game, unless in my 20+ years of life, I still haven't found the status screen, also, can you check how many life I have left? And where my last checkpoint was?

A tactical element, is something, say... a shooting unit deciding whether or not to shoot at my wyches charging at them, while my incubi are also in range, but have yet to declare a charge, "Should I reduce the damage I'll take from his wyches? But what if the incubi charges me and I lost my overwatch?"; similarly, on my end, I'd be using the wyches to absorb the overwatch, so my incubi wouldn't have to risk being shot at, but I retain the ability to then change my incubi's action should he not overwatch, and my wyches didn't make the assault. It's a situation that may arise, or it may not, but myself and my opponent would have to adapt to should it arise.

On the other hand, random dice roll isn't tactical, as I've said just a few posts back, if your assault units are those that can stand in the open and take a few shots, there's nothing of value that's lost here, you wouldn't mind getting a few BS1 shots on a failed assault, and then standing in the open, since it already is standing in the open before that. BUT if you are playing a less durable units, I'll use the overused example you've seen in every thread by now, the wyches... they wanna be in assault, at full strength should that be possible, as soon as they leave the raider, so... in this case, instead of the 7"(minimum run + 6" assault) of our last edition, I'd deploy them closer, so I have a less chance to fail an assault and losing my wyches. This is a tactical shift from 5th to 6th, there'll be little changes from then on, once a player has found the optimal adaptation of the new rules, they will stick to it, or they will buy a whole new set of units to replace the now-useless units.

The fun tactical element should be something that you and your opponent have control over, if I know Tau can shoot 30" with their rapid fire, I'd try to stay out of the range, that's tactical. If I know my threat bubble of my guns is 36", I'd use that as an advantage to pit my opponent into the corner, that's tactical. If I'm trying to get inside my enemy's fire range with more than one unit, because I know he can only fire at one unit per turn, so I'll use distraction meatshield units to take out the hits, that's tactical. But if all of that is being random, then where is the tactical in that? It's just rolling dice for the sake of rolling dice.

It's the same with Monopoly, the most expensive street is always at the end of the lap, why didn't they make it all random to be "tactical"? Because there is no tactic in that.

And finally, I ask again, why isn't this "random is so tactical and fun" element added to shooting?

6th and what not

doctorludo — GMT

Negator80 wrote:
doctorludo wrote:
Negator80 wrote:
doctorludo wrote:Conversely, I never understood why being bad at guessing distances should make my army less effective in a tabletop strategy game.

Then you should understand that if my squad leader told me to sprint 100 meters to cover where it was actually 200 meters while under fire, he would be a bad squad leader. And for the same reason, youd be a bad wargamer.

But this isn't real life. It's a strategy game. There are plenty of other real-life skills that are translated into dice rolls in 40K. Accuracy, combat ability and strength, for instance. So rolling distance is a way of incorporating various random aspects of battle into an assault. As the leader, you have a chance to decide whether to charge a closer unit, with a higher chance of success.

In reality, I think the real reason it's been changed is that it's a common way people can cheat.

Sounds good on paper, but highly impractical.

Also, i pride myself in playing well. I dont pride myself in rolling dice well. Which are you?

I'm outta here.

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Baronyu wrote:
Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:Oh and this is a clear buff to marines.

Oh yeah, that's exactly what I said.

it is exactly what you said. You even explained it. 'stack the odds'=better chance at getting lucky. However, the options you have to stack those odds are quite limited.

I don't think luck works the way you think it does.

If there's a 50% chance of failure, a good player will commit two units to the task, halving his rate of failure.

With the same luck, a good player is now twice as likely to succeed.

The way you're saying it, I should be able to charge some Grots into a Paladin Deathstar and expect to destroy it because hey, it's all just luck, right?

Eh.... hmm... First of all, luck is not a quantitive value, you cannot have the "same" luck, this isn't a video game, unless in my 20+ years of life, I still haven't found the status screen, also, can you check how many life I have left? And where my last checkpoint was?

A tactical element, is something, say... a shooting unit deciding whether or not to shoot at my wyches charging at them, while my incubi are also in range, but have yet to declare a charge, "Should I reduce the damage I'll take from his wyches? But what if the incubi charges me and I lost my overwatch?"; similarly, on my end, I'd be using the wyches to absorb the overwatch, so my incubi wouldn't have to risk being shot at, but I retain the ability to then change my incubi's action should he not overwatch, and my wyches didn't make the assault. It's a situation that may arise, or it may not, but myself and my opponent would have to adapt to should it arise.

On the other hand, random dice roll isn't tactical, as I've said just a few posts back, if your assault units are those that can stand in the open and take a few shots, there's nothing of value that's lost here, you wouldn't mind getting a few BS1 shots on a failed assault, and then standing in the open, since it already is standing in the open before that. BUT if you are playing a less durable units, I'll use the overused example you've seen in every thread by now, the wyches... they wanna be in assault, at full strength should that be possible, as soon as they leave the raider, so... in this case, instead of the 7"(minimum run + 6" assault) of our last edition, I'd deploy them closer, so I have a less chance to fail an assault and losing my wyches. This is a tactical shift from 5th to 6th, there'll be little changes from then on, once a player has found the optimal adaptation of the new rules, they will stick to it, or they will buy a whole new set of units to replace the now-useless units.

The fun tactical element should be something that you and your opponent have control over, if I know Tau can shoot 30" with their rapid fire, I'd try to stay out of the range, that's tactical. If I know my threat bubble of my guns is 36", I'd use that as an advantage to pit my opponent into the corner, that's tactical. If I'm trying to get inside my enemy's fire range with more than one unit, because I know he can only fire at one unit per turn, so I'll use distraction meatshield units to take out the hits, that's tactical. But if all of that is being random, then where is the tactical in that? It's just rolling dice for the sake of rolling dice.

It's the same with Monopoly, the most expensive street is always at the end of the lap, why didn't they make it all random to be "tactical"? Because there is no tactic in that.

And finally, I ask again, why isn't this "random is so tactical and fun" element added to shooting?

They're too busy rationalizing to pay attention to logic.

Re:6th and what not

Squishy — GMT

Negator80 wrote:

They're too busy rationalizing to pay attention to logic.

I just watched you make a complete fool of yourself, insult 3 other people, and openly attack someone for not conforming to your idea of logic. I feel sorry for whatever group you play with.

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Squishy wrote:
Negator80 wrote:

They're too busy rationalizing to pay attention to logic.

I just watched you make a complete fool of yourself, insult 3 other people, and openly attack someone for not conforming to your idea of logic. I feel sorry for whatever group you play with.

Im quite nice actually, didnt insult anybody, and only expected reasonable amounts of logic. And you really shouldnt twist words or situations because I didnt 'attack' anybody for not 'conforming'. If someone cant see why its a good idea to have an umbrella on a rainy day, thats not my fault nor should i be 'attacked' by someone for questioning their logic.

Back on track, why is random charge better then non random?

6th and what not

xttz — GMT

I too like to post threads just to start arguments.

Republicans are better than Democrats guys! Thoughts?

6th and what not

Brotherjanus — GMT

The average on 2d6 is 7. Charges actually got longer in most circumstances.

6th and what not

michaelcycle — GMT

Anyone read the new beast rules and move through cover? Scarabs are just VILE now. Especially with 2d6 charge... mech lists are no more.

Re:6th and what not

loota boy — GMT

Squishy wrote:
Negator80 wrote:

They're too busy rationalizing to pay attention to logic.

I just watched you make a complete fool of yourself, insult 3 other people, and openly attack someone for not conforming to your idea of logic. I feel sorry for whatever group you play with.

Exalted. Negator, you really ought to learn about common courtesy. It'll make people be much more likely to listen to you and take you seriously. You'll also probably win a few more friends.

That's all I have to say. I don't think i'll check this thread again, because you'll probably respond to this with some rude, un-based remark on my intelligence that i'd care not to hear.

Re:6th and what not

Buttons — GMT

Negator80 wrote:Your are simply wrong. It doesnt force you to be more careful; why be careful when in the end, its about luck?

Your example only proves yourself wrong lol. I'll let you figure that one out.

It does force you to be more careful. For example, there are two units nearby that you may want to assault, it is your movement phase. Unit A is 15 inches away and is a very expensive unit that you can probably kill in hand to hand (lets say it is some marine HQ out of cover with vanguard vets and you have Incubi), Unit B is 9 inches away and is far less valuable (lets say a basic assault marine squad ). Now you have to take a risk assessment. If you go for Unit A you will have to assault a unit 9 inches away, which is pretty unlikely (certainly feasible, but not odds that one should reasonably expect to make). If you go for Unit B you will have to charge a mere 3 inches on 2D6 which is almost guaranteed.

Now you need to decide, do you assault the closer unit and waste an opportunity to kill that expensive HQ, or do you take a risk and assault the close unit, getting shot to bits and assaulted if you fail to reach them?

Re:6th and what not

Awesome Christ — GMT

I have found, over and over and over and over again that luck plays a very small amount in the game once your playing with more complex stratagies. I've lost only a half a dozen games over the last 3 years or so since I got past the learning phase to bad luck, and that was "rolled 6 1s and 4 2s in one roll" kind of bad odds all game to make luck important. you hedge your bets your have back up plans and you don't bank on 12" of charge.

but if the OP's response to "this just makes it so you need to think more critically about your stratagy" is "Your are simply wrong" just ignore him, he's clearly just seeking attention, ignore him.

6th and what not

English Assassin — GMT

Hmm. I'm not keen on the idea of random charges, simply because it seems to offer the prospect of a few poor die rolls changing the outcome of a game.

I'm distinctly unkeen on pre-measuring, too, for that matter, since it tends to lead to endless analysis paralysis (and it's hardly as though WH40k doesn't already have a surfeit of dead time).

6th and what not

Whatsit Tooya — GMT

sniperjolly wrote:Here is a very simple reason they added random charge distance.

Pre-measuring.

Exactly, I had so many people try and do this when they were checking for "range" in the shooting phase or just "holding the tape measure out." Really pissed me off. Now you'll have to really strategize. It does suck that there is a potential of your charge only being two inches but this is more realistic. Multiple times in history, a great charge was stopped flat due to bad terrain or the front stumbling and stuff like that. Running towards the enemy is always a matter of hoping you don't trip up.

Re:6th and what not

warpcrafter — GMT

Bah! Just a game. OP, go find something more meaningful to get all rabid about. I don't like everything about this edition, but it's the best version of 40K yet, and so I plan to play it as often as possible.

Re:6th and what not

Sephyr — GMT

Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:Ah right. There's a little bit of logic finally. from here, the argument is simply: this is too random and stupid.

And everyone runs around with 4T and a 3+ save too right? Nevermind all those xenos races that wont be able to weather the return fire.

You know what, I give up. I have no idea what you're even talking about, and I strongly suspect it's because you have no idea what you're talking about.

This seems pretty clear to me, Kaldor. Though maybe his way of putting it was not the most appropriate.

Can anyone's charge fail? Yes, of course. You can march uber-close and still roll snake-eyes and hang there like a dope. No one is arguing that.

Now...does everyine pay the same PRICE for that bad luck?

No. MeQs and TeQs will hurt, of course, but on average they will weather the lost turn decently. They have sturdy T and saves to deal with wounds, carry weapons with a good volume of fire for overwatch, and so on. You may even be able to wipe it, but it'll take some focused fire from a few units.

Other armies with more fragile CC troops? You can feasibly wipe the unit that failed the charge with a single unit's firepower and move on to the next.

So the risk is the same for all. The effects of that risk are not. Is it clear?

6th and what not

rvianarpg — GMT

My 2 cents.

Randomness is good at a certain amount.
In my opinion i think the best rule could be something that mix both possibilities, something like:

charge - "6" of movement.
Risk charge - 2d6 of movement .

so...you´ll have the chance of avoid randomness, opting for the fixed 6 in. charge. or, you could risk yourself trying to achieve a charge of 2 or 12 !

so you´ll have the cinematic scene like in the old "the man of the iron mask" (Di Caprio) when the musketters charge in the corridor with lot´s of lesser musketters in their front, guns in hand.
Something like: " ok. if i dont caught them now, i´ll be shooted to death...so let´s try....charge! " or " ok...if i run, i could not reach them, due to shooting and grenades (fluff), better take a good position to next chance Charge!"

so....a good player will now what to do to avoid, unavoid charge range...but luck, and daring, will take their token too!

bye!

6th and what not

60mm — GMT

Random charge distance might not seem that bad but have a few goes with a CC nid army, stack on overwatch and the various CC nerfs. Then come back and tell me having a random charge distance is good.

I got an idea, why not make gun range random too? 4d6 for bolters. No problem right, random is fun!

6th and what not

ZebioLizard2 — GMT

60mm wrote:Random charge distance might not seem that bad but have a few goes with a CC nid army, stack on overwatch and the various CC nerfs. Then come back and tell me having a random charge distance is good.

I got an idea, why not make gun range random too? 4d6 for bolters. No problem right, random is fun!

You lost fearless no retreat wounds, your rage now gives +2 if your out of synapse, you still have FNP given by tervigons, you have cover saves that can be granted by venomthropes, you can now CC vehicles with an actual rate.

6th and what not

rvianarpg — GMT

60mm wrote:Random charge distance might not seem that bad but have a few goes with a CC nid army, stack on overwatch and the various CC nerfs. Then come back and tell me having a random charge distance is good.

I got an idea, why not make gun range random too? 4d6 for bolters. No problem right, random is fun!

i agree with you in a degree.

I think every weapon should have a half range with a FIX number and a Max. Range with a random number (half + Xd6) (gravity affecting the bullet, wind, ambient distorting laser, cooled plasma...you name it)

so. everything in the game should have a "zone of confort" - fix range - and a "zone of randomness" - d6 plus range.

bye

Re:6th and what not

DiRTWaL — GMT

Kaldor is right. This is going to separate a good general from the bad. This simulates a true battle field and how a real battle works, we don't know if they are getting to get there; a hole in the ground, a slip, a bug flying into your eye, bright shiny things. This is going to simulate distractions and such in battle.

Re:6th and what not

rvianarpg — GMT

DiRTWaL wrote:Kaldor is right. This is going to separate a good general from the bad. This simulates a true battle field and how a real battle works, we don't know if they are getting to get there; a hole in the ground, a slip, a bug flying into your eye, bright shiny things. This is going to simulate distractions and such in battle.

agree again. But also, a bad roll day will ruin all your day, including the fun! So luck and bad luck, should be mitigated!

bye

6th and what not

60mm — GMT

Fearless no retreat change is good
Terv/venom buffs are nothing new and were nerfed as well
Cc vs vehicles got nerfed a bit for MCs, buffed a bit for gaunts, seems to be a wash overall unless you wanna go all dakka which just doesnt feel nid at all but no complaints from me there really
The rage/synapse thing is utter crap, i dont care if its better, it goes against the core of Tyranid fluff. So now I should have everyone with feed AVOID synapse and hope they fail ld tests . . . to get better Huh? Not gonna go into that.

And none of those make up for not being able to determine when you can and cant use your weapons when you play a CC army. Falling short and then getting obliterated because your murderous creatures on a feeding spree got lazy and decided to run 10 ft less isn't tactical. Like i said, if random range for CC is fine, why not random shoot range? Whats the problem there?

Re:6th and what not

Bludbaff — GMT

Baronyu wrote:And finally, I ask again, why isn't this "random is so tactical and fun" element added to shooting?

I concur. Now that you can measure before you finalize your orders, we shouldn't use the old system where if you're in range you automatically hit. Maybe have a "hit roll" to see how good your attack is! That's a great idea, why hasn't it been used yet?

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Alrighty, so i apologize for being so vitriolic.

On another note, perhaps for each heavy weapon you have, you should roll a D6 before the fight. On each 1, it malfunctions for the game. That way, the good players will stack the odds by bringing more of them. Same thing for space marine armor; its so old there's a chance its power source fizzles at the start of each game and that model fights without its armor save.

Re:6th and what not

ZebioLizard2 — GMT

Negator80 wrote:Alrighty, so i apologize for being so vitriolic.

On another note, perhaps for each heavy weapon you have, you should roll a D6 before the fight. On each 1, it malfunctions for the game. That way, the good players will stack the odds by bringing more of them. Same thing for space marine armor; its so old there's a chance its power source fizzles at the start of each game and that model fights without its armor save.

Before this happens though, on a 1 they should malfunction, than on another d6 they should see what happens, with a 6 being it explodes and takes out three or so units without an armour save.

I'm sorry, but I'm a fantasy player as well, I'm so used to things exploding that this really wouldn't bother me at all

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

DiRTWaL wrote:Kaldor is right. This is going to separate a good general from the bad. This simulates a true battle field and how a real battle works, we don't know if they are getting to get there; a hole in the ground, a slip, a bug flying into your eye, bright shiny things. This is going to simulate distractions and such in battle.

I dont understand how it seperates the good general from the bad. Didnt the old system do that just as well?

6th and what not

Baronyu — GMT

rvianarpg wrote:My 2 cents.

Randomness is good at a certain amount.
In my opinion i think the best rule could be something that mix both possibilities, something like:

charge - "6" of movement.
Risk charge - 2d6 of movement .

so...you´ll have the chance of avoid randomness, opting for the fixed 6 in. charge. or, you could risk yourself trying to achieve a charge of 2 or 12 !

so you´ll have the cinematic scene like in the old "the man of the iron mask" (Di Caprio) when the musketters charge in the corridor with lot´s of lesser musketters in their front, guns in hand.
Something like: " ok. if i dont caught them now, i´ll be shooted to death...so let´s try....charge! " or " ok...if i run, i could not reach them, due to shooting and grenades (fluff), better take a good position to next chance Charge!"

so....a good player will now what to do to avoid, unavoid charge range...but luck, and daring, will take their token too!

bye!

To be honest, I like this idea, why aren't you writing the rulebook? Go find a time machine and fix 6th ed! While you're at it, bring back fleet = run + charge!!

6th and what not

JbR of the Endless Spire — GMT

squishy and xttz... are you trolls?

OP I think people have taken offence to your use of the word dumb... but in regards to my thoughts on it I personally think its the worst move of the lot for 6th ed. 2d6+I stat may have been better (oh hello WHFB again?!) Not only will tyranids (immensely assault based army) have to deal with no allies, they will have to deal with reduced cover saves (a good thing over all, just very bad in their case) being shot at when they initiate a charge (so those plucky few who made it all the way across the battlefield still aren't safe) and then run the risk of their assault not even reaching the enemy (how was effectively writing of the most unique army in 40k a smart move GW?)

EDIT: Assaulting in general seems like a no go in this edition... it's just too much of a risk for everyone except space marines or MCs.

6th and what not

hotsauceman1 — GMT

MAybe thats the point? Assaults are kinda the only way to do something in 5th. Shooting was to just get a few outta the way.
Now shooting is a masssive detterant as is assault.

6th and what not

rvianarpg — GMT

Baronyu wrote:
rvianarpg wrote:My 2 cents.

Randomness is good at a certain amount.
In my opinion i think the best rule could be something that mix both possibilities, something like:

charge - "6" of movement.
Risk charge - 2d6 of movement .

so...you´ll have the chance of avoid randomness, opting for the fixed 6 in. charge. or, you could risk yourself trying to achieve a charge of 2 or 12 !

so you´ll have the cinematic scene like in the old "the man of the iron mask" (Di Caprio) when the musketters charge in the corridor with lot´s of lesser musketters in their front, guns in hand.
Something like: " ok. if i dont caught them now, i´ll be shooted to death...so let´s try....charge! " or " ok...if i run, i could not reach them, due to shooting and grenades (fluff), better take a good position to next chance Charge!"

so....a good player will now what to do to avoid, unavoid charge range...but luck, and daring, will take their token too!

bye!

To be honest, I like this idea, why aren't you writing the rulebook? Go find a time machine and fix 6th ed! While you're at it, bring back fleet = run + charge!!

I´m trying to go back, but im out of "chernobly" and my "time tube machine" will not work without it! by the way, do you have contact with Chevy Chase? he´ll know how to fix it!

Re:6th and what not

Talon31 — GMT

Kaldor wrote:
Negator80 wrote:Oh and this is a clear buff to marines.

Oh yeah, that's exactly what I said.

it is exactly what you said. You even explained it. 'stack the odds'=better chance at getting lucky. However, the options you have to stack those odds are quite limited.

I don't think luck works the way you think it does.

If there's a 50% chance of failure, a good player will commit two units to the task, halving his rate of failure.

With the same luck, a good player is now twice as likely to succeed.

The way you're saying it, I should be able to charge some Grots into a Paladin Deathstar and expect to destroy it because hey, it's all just luck, right?

This, but instead of "same luck" I recomend "same chance of failure" as this might help to stop the confusion surrounding "what luck is" in this thread. Credit though as I couldnt have explained it better myself.

While there would be better rules, like the aforementioned fixed/risk charge (kudos) I think that this particular change will benefit the game and help make it more unpredictable and enjoyable. But then hey, Im not so bothered about winning as some people are. I just like a good time and if one bad roll of the dice ruins the fun for you then I'd rather not play you.

No offence intended ^^ maybe its just because I'm used to rolling poorly.

Regards, Talon

6th and what not

ZebioLizard2 — GMT

As a fantasy player, random charges actually did help out fantasy a bit, though I kinda wish they had made it so it was 2D6 + a unit's speed (GW! Bring back actual movement rates for 40K!)

Re:6th and what not

Lanrak — GMT

All games have random elements in them.

Most good wargames list the AVERAGE preformance of a unit , as fixed values on thier stat line.
And the game mechanics use this statistical value to resolve interaction of the unit with other elements, to get the % chance of sucess.(What score on a dice you need to roll to suceed.)

This way the players need to use thier strategic planing and tactical acumen to win the game.

If you want to move away from 'guess ranges' and all the 'cheating ' it presents than pre-measuring is the right way to go.

However, random movement is not the best way to deal with pre-measureing.
Having a movment characteristic and implementing an target aqusition roll .(to see roll.)Seems to offer a better option.

It moves the 'luck ' to the targeting part of the attack, not the result of the attack itself.
(Which is more realistic, as a unit not sure, simply will not commit themselves to the attack..)

Its easier to explain how a unit can not clearly identify an enemy threat , so stays put.

Rather than stop half way to a target ,and getting shot up as a result!

And not attacking has the same effect on all units , rather than the make them stand in no mans land to get shot up.Where well protected units loose far less than lightly protected units do.

Just a thought....

6th and what not

marielle — GMT

Random charge distance and pre-measuring is actually reinforcing the skill of judging distance. The only difference is the assessment now is not binary - are they in or out - but factors in elements that some might like to call chance (but is no different to judging the chance elements involved in shooting and combat)

It also cuts down on cheating within the game - if you think the rubber ruler is action, just measure it yourself - and cuts down on arguments. It also makes the game move faster.

Oh and when you get the hang of it you can set baits and traps, and force the opponent to make moves that are to your advantage.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

hotsauceman1 wrote:MAybe thats the point? Assaults are kinda the only way to do something in 5th. Shooting was to just get a few outta the way.
Now shooting is a masssive detterant as is assault.

Really?

Isn't that what chaff is for?

6th and what not

Baronyu — GMT

marielle wrote:Random charge distance and pre-measuring is actually reinforcing the skill of judging distance. The only difference is the assessment now is not binary - are they in or out - but factors in elements that some might like to call chance (but is no different to judging the chance elements involved in shooting and combat)

3rd time in this thread, if random charge distance is a way to improve the whole judging distance, experience, etc whatever you guys wanna call it, but if these changes are to "improve" the game in some way or the other, I must ask again: Why do they only apply to assault? Wouldn't rolling 4D6 or so for each gun be far more entertaining as well? May be your tactical marine was distracted by a butterfly during the shooting phase!

It also cuts down on cheating within the game - if you think the rubber ruler is action, just measure it yourself - and cuts down on arguments. It also makes the game move faster.

Having to roll 2 dice in the assault phase, possibly pre-measuring before hand, possibly re-rolling if you have rules that allow, is hardly faster than 5th ed's declare-charge-and-you-are-charged, in fact, I'd even go as far as calling it slower.

However, it'll certainly make it "faster" if a lot of people forgo assault units and bring more shooting instead, so I'll give you that.

Oh and when you get the hang of it you can set baits and traps, and force the opponent to make moves that are to your advantage.

How is that not possible in 5th ed? And what if your so-called "baits and traps" failed? Is this what good generals do? "We'll fire in the sky and hope the wind will carry our bullet to the target."?

Pardon my sarcasm, but none of what you said made any sense to me!

Re:6th and what not

Negator80 — GMT

Perhaps you should roll an artillery dice to determine the direction you charge as well? That would make just as much sense, and be viable based on the same rationalization thats being used to justify random distance.

6th and what not

marielle — GMT

Baronyu wrote:
marielle wrote:Random charge distance and pre-measuring is actually reinforcing the skill of judging distance. The only difference is the assessment now is not binary - are they in or out - but factors in elements that some might like to call chance (but is no different to judging the chance elements involved in shooting and combat)

3rd time in this thread, if random charge distance is a way to improve the whole judging distance, experience, etc whatever you guys wanna call it, but if these changes are to "improve" the game in some way or the other, I must ask again: Why do they only apply to assault? Wouldn't rolling 4D6 or so for each gun be far more entertaining as well? May be your tactical marine was distracted by a butterfly during the shooting phase!

It also cuts down on cheating within the game - if you think the rubber ruler is action, just measure it yourself - and cuts down on arguments. It also makes the game move faster.

Having to roll 2 dice in the assault phase, possibly pre-measuring before hand, possibly re-rolling if you have rules that allow, is hardly faster than 5th ed's declare-charge-and-you-are-charged, in fact, I'd even go as far as calling it slower.

However, it'll certainly make it "faster" if a lot of people forgo assault units and bring more shooting instead, so I'll give you that.

Oh and when you get the hang of it you can set baits and traps, and force the opponent to make moves that are to your advantage.

How is that not possible in 5th ed? And what if your so-called "baits and traps" failed? Is this what good generals do? "We'll fire in the sky and hope the wind will carry our bullet to the target."?

Pardon my sarcasm, but none of what you said made any sense to me!

It's not sarcasm, I'm not sure what it is but it is not sarcasm.

But whatever...

1) Don't you already roll 2D6 to resolve successful shooting attacks.

2) it is faster because generally both players will have measured the distance before the charge declarations, so it is just a matter of rolling the dice.

3) Good generals make allowance for friction, bad generals blame poor fire control.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Negator80 wrote:Perhaps you should roll an artillery dice to determine the direction you charge as well? That would make just as much sense, and be viable based on the same rationalization thats being used to justify random distance.

If you want to do this when playing me then go ahead, and if you run into your own troops then I expect you to attack them as well.

As for every other game, I'll just assess the potential threat range and make plans based on that.

6th and what not

Baronyu — GMT

1) I..I'm lost, sorry. When do we roll 2D6 for shooting...? Or do you mean the to hit/wound/save/FNP? Because those are still in for assault, but what I was saying is that, you don't have to roll for range for guns, as posters on 2nd page have pointed out, a gun could also fail to hit its intended range due to numerous factor.

2) But isn't it faster if we just measure the 6" once, by one player, then roll the dice for the overwatch and the combat?

3) But, if you read my earlier post, I think it was in the 1st page, a fun tactical element should be, for example, using my DL threat bubble to keep your vehicles/terminators/etc away? Or using several units to form a meatshield to protect a valuable asset? Or choosing to take out the immediate threat of an assault unit, or risk it all and fire at that heavy fire unit? Wouldn't that be more interesting? How exactly are you going to get "used to" random assault distance? You'd probably just settle for a safe distance you're comfortable with and always charge from there.

Oh, and I meant no offense, sorry. :( Am in a funny mood.

6th and what not

marielle — GMT

Baronyu wrote:1) I..I'm lost, sorry. When do we roll 2D6 for shooting...? Or do you mean the to hit/wound/save/FNP? Because those are still in for assault, but what I was saying is that, you don't have to roll for range for guns, as posters on 2nd page have pointed out, a gun could also fail to hit its intended range due to numerous factor.

2) But isn't it faster if we just measure the 6" once, by one player, then roll the dice for the overwatch and the combat?

3) But, if you read my earlier post, I think it was in the 1st page, a fun tactical element should be, for example, using my DL threat bubble to keep your vehicles/terminators/etc away? Or using several units to form a meatshield to protect a valuable asset? Or choosing to take out the immediate threat of an assault unit, or risk it all and fire at that heavy fire unit? Wouldn't that be more interesting? How exactly are you going to get "used to" random assault distance? You'd probably just settle for a safe distance you're comfortable with and always charge from there.

Oh, and I meant no offense, sorry. :( Am in a funny mood.

1) roll 1d6 to hit and 1d6 to wound = 2d6 - the range thing is superfluous as there are not random ranges in the game.

2) Yes, but in 5th as no one has made any measurements, it opens all kinds of arguments as to whether it is 6"s or 6.25" - particularly in a binary system in which one player is deliberately moving less than the max (to stop the charge) and the other is moving more than the max (to ensure the charge). The dice rolls for overwatch etc will take far less time than the discussions revolving around the implication of cheating.

3) You can still do all you say. Plus you appear to make the assumption that the assaulter will not get into combat. The experience of WFB is that this is not the case and that generally combat occurs in the 2nd turn onwards, where in 7th it was not joined until the 3rd turn and onwards. There are ways to avoid it, if you really don't want to, hence my comment about controlling the enemy movement.

6th and what not

TerminalDragon — GMT

I agree with OP. My main reason for this being that I myself have atrocious "luck". The only things I don't roll low for is Leadership, although I play SM so it's all gravy. Most of the time.

This rule allows for more sitting still with a long range weapon and blasting the hell out of the enemy and if they do charge you have the chance to kill them anyway.

Good one GW. Good one.

6th and what not

Talon31 — GMT

Do we mean scatter dice when we say artillery dice??

6th and what not

IPS — GMT

haven't read through all of this thread, but yea the randomness does seem like an easy way for GW to "balance" their game..

this way everybody will win some games and loose some, no matter how good the army is or how good you play.
(that's also why I personally think the pancake edition was much better than the actual 6th...it wasn't perfect, but it allowed much more tactic.>< )