Random assaulting debate that shouldn't even need to be debated

[Tynskel]

My thoughts exactly.

Even not defending the fluff, random charges add more tactical elements of the game. Do you gamble on a charge when your units are 7"+ away, or do you weather the fire, and try to get in closer? Do you switch from small units to larger units designed to absorb more punishment?

What I really don't understand is why people are complaining about this–there have been random charges since at least 2nd Edition. If the unit you were attempting to charge was in cover, you had to roll the dice!

[Mr Mystery]

Although my experience is LARP based, let me tell you organising a coherent charge is pretty damned difficult. Across open ground without incoming fire sure, you can get ten dudes to match pace. But in amongst an ongoing pagga? That's a different matter.

40k is won or lost in the assault phase. It's the most reliable way to drive the enemy off an objective and then hold it yourself. It SHOULD be risky. It shouldn't be a foregone conclusion.

Keep it random! Give a ranged army half a chance.

[wittdooley]

...dude, you shouldn't have even rolled for that charge. Fleet doesn't let you run and then assault any more.

Those four ones were the dice's way of telling you "you iz mukkin' about."

Oh... well shyte. Clearly I do more modeling and painting than playing . Though I suppose the re-roll does the same as the 'new' Fleet does.

[Sainhann]

Yes, another thread about 6th. Sorry, but I've played it enough and I'm still disappointed in GW.

The fact that you have to get across the table and then leave it up to dice as to whether you get to do anything or not is just... well dumb.

Oh sure, the average is better, but failed charges happen on a regular basis. A 6" move would be much better than having 2D6 because at least you're not leaving it to the dice to determine how good you do.


The main reason for this thread is to keep the fire alive. I don't like where GW is heading with my game and I think they need to know what they are doing wrong.

Now, this may sound crazy, but I liked the 5th edition rule book. Most people complained, but it simplified things and allowed for more balanced gameplay. Granted, they screwed it up with all the crazy codexes, but I liked the rule book in general.

Now, anyone who isn't saying good things about 6th is a cry baby. I'm tired of GW ruining my game, but I like 40k so much I'm not about to quit. Re-writing everything is the best idea I can come up with. You know, a book entirely of house rules. That's how disappointed the direction 6th headed for.

So, you guys with me? I don't mean to hurt anybody, I just want Warhammer 40k to be fun. And if you disagree, state your opinion. No need to insult. If I wrote anything to offend, just tell me and I will edit it (unless I can't for some reason). Mod, find this to be spam, just dump it and I'm sorry ahead of time.

No and be glad that I did not write the rules because I would have put far more random stuff into the game.

Like card-activation (hey I GW and I shouldn't pass up the chance to get more money from you). So instead of the standard U-go/I-go you would not know which unit would be going. You can't get more random than that.

So you know that that one unit of yours is hanging out there and you really want to move them. But the card for one of your opponent's unit came up first and they charge into your unit.

But not is all lost since you have some other units that could come to the support of your other unit. If only they can act before the Melee/Close Combat card show up.

Way more intense and you need to be thinking all the time.

[Sainhann]

Well I still miss 2nd...

So do I, the game was far more balance back then.

How else could a lowly Harlequin being the only member of his squad still alive pull the heart of that Blood Axe Warlord's Ogryn bodyguard and throw it into the Warlord face before causing a wound on the Warlord.

I had far more fun playing 2nd Edition then any 4th-6th Edition.

[Bean]

I really like that the game now allows premeasuring--rules against premeasuring are dumb in pretty much every way.

I don't really mind a little bit of increased randomness, but it feels inappropriate for charges--mainly because a failed charge is such a game-altering event and there really isn't any way to account for it in planning. When you need a four and you roll a three, that's very unlikely--and it might actually determine the outcome of the game (I've seen it happen, more than once) and that seems like a very bad game design element.

The success and failure of charges is just too important to be left to chance, and the fact that they are renders the game, on its own, renders the game a vastly less legitimate competitive exercise than it would be otherwise, which I think is a shame.

[Sainhann]

Mmm... Newp. Squidy, I gots to disagree with you. Vehemently.

I play Tau, and I started play in 5th. Under 5th edition rules, I basically ran an all-mechanized force because the only survivable models I had were Crisis Suits, Hammerheads, and Broadsides. I can't remember how many times I lost entire units in one round because I got just a hair too close. I never, and I do mean NEVER debarked my (always minimum) count of Fire Warriors from their Hammerhead until I was cornered and could no longer maneuver out of the way.

So you decide that because they could be killed not to use your army to it fullest.

Yes Tau Fire Warriors are squishly and that they die.

But conside this they also come with the best Infantry weapon in the game. True they are not going to kill a Space Marine outright with it due to the 3+ save that the Marine has.

But they will end up wounding that Marine and will kill outright, Imperial Guard, Eldar Guardians (actually most Eldar due to wounding on 2+), & Orks.

My Imperial Guard army is 190 models at 2,000 points 186 Infantry & 4 Chimeras. I expect to lose Guardsmen but I would go into a game knowing that.

So your opponent has that hard *** assualt unit that wants in close combat so give him an unit to kill then see if he can dance afterwards. I have killed many large nasty models and units because the weight of fire was too much.

I would love to have a strength 5, 30 inch, AP 5 weapon. My Eldar Guardians were nerfed years ago by GW because they had a strength 4, 24 inch weapon that killed Marines due the -2 save. But the -2 save has been gone for many years but did the Eldar Guardians get their weapon back.

Nope, GW has kept it as a strength 4, 12 inch, AP 5 weapon. The results most Eldar armies don't use Guardians anymore.

So your basic Tau trooper has the best gun while my basic Eldar trooper weapon is pure junk.

[DarkLink]

I like premeasuring, and I laugh every time I hear someone complain about how "but guessing range was totally a skill that, like, made the game better, man". Artificial difficulty, and nothing more. I have more fun without premeasuring.

Random Charge Length, on the other hand, removes most of the skill associated with the assault phase and replaces it with 2D6. You used to be able to carefully position models to avoid terrain, and only get stuck in with certain models, and pull enemy units off objectives, and all sorts of cool stuff. Now, you can only do that if you roll just right for Random Charge Length. You can get screwed over with snake eyes (and no one had better give me any bull**** about how everyone was always in cover always under any and all circumstances regardless of anything else and so RCL doesn't matter) if you roll too low, and you can get screwed over for rolling too high by being forced to engage enemy models and not letting them pile in.

Randomness can enhance the game, but not when it removes skill. Randomness in shooting and close combat attacks is good, because it adds the skill of gauging the odds to the shooting and assault phase. Otherwise, you'd just plug a few numbers into a calculator and remove X casualties for Y guns. That would be boring. Charges, however, already relied on player skill in that positioning your models was absolutely crucial. RCL removes much of that player skill. That's bad game design.

[Nabterayl]

Randomness can enhance the game, but not when it removes skill. Randomness in shooting and close combat attacks is good, because it adds the skill of gauging the odds to the shooting and assault phase. Otherwise, you'd just plug a few numbers into a calculator and remove X casualties for Y guns. That would be boring. Charges, however, already relied on player skill in that positioning your models was absolutely crucial. RCL removes much of that player skill. That's bad game design.

I think it's more an example of designing for something other than what you want. You disliked premeasuring because it required a skill that was "artificial" (and I did too, for the same reason). But you liked being able to carefully position models to avoid terrain and only get stuck in with certain models etc. From my perspective, the cool stuff you describe was artificial. I like random charge length because it better represents what a charge into hand-to-hand combat is really like. I don't require my 40K to look exactly like what combat in the 41st millennium would really look like, but I view pro-realism changes like RCL as a positive.

If the cool stuff you describe is considered desirable by the game designer, then RCL is bad game design. If verisimilitude is considered desirable, then RCL is good game design. And so on for another thousand possible design objectives, any one (or none) of which could have been the actual goal.

[DarkLink]

I didn't really dislike not-premeasuring, I just prefer being able to premeasure and think that the meta ability to gauge distance doesn't really add anything to the gameplay.

On the other hand, I dislike rules for cinema's sake. I want a solid game first and foremost. You can create fluffy units and army lists to create a story all you want. I don't mind the ability to randomly reach out to 12", that keeps people on their toes and can dramatically change the game. Failed charges, though, especially combined with Overwatch, can arbitrarily screw people over and create a lot of frustration, with no real way to work around it other than "get really close". If RCL were 2d6 or 6", pick the highest, I wouldn't mind it at all. You get randomness without the frustration.