Sception Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Fixing alpha rushes is a matter of giving ranged opponents the ability to respond before the unit is locked in combat and hence untargetable. Making the charge disordered may, if anything, make the problem worse, since it might make it more reliable for the combat to end in the enemy turn. Allowing alpha rush or assault-from-reserve type elements in the game really relies on the enemy being able to take a shooting phase between the attacking players movement and assault phase - whether through a real overwatch rule (ie a unit can opt to go into 'overwatch' in their shooting phase - in which case they do not shoot or run, and cannot assault that turn; but they may choose to shoot immediately after the opponent's movement phase. instead of granting an extra attack when charged, counterassault might allow one to make an assault move instead of shooting on overwatch), or swapping player shooting phases (ie, I move, you shoot, I assault; you move, I shoot, you assault - a really interesting turn order variant that I recommend trying out some time), or going for a LotR style single game turn with priority (ie, roll priority, I win, so I move, you move, I shoot, you shoot, I assault, you assault; roll for priority again, and I take a penalty on the roll since I had priority last turn, another variant well worth trying). What all of these options do is allow ranged enemies an opportunity to respond to melee threats that arrive on the board before those threats are locked in combat and thus untargetable. With such rules in place, you could give units like warp talons the ability to assault the turn they deep strike, or allow units to assault out of dreadclaws the turn they land. There are downsides to such rules - overwatch can encourage bogged down, static games, while the variant turn orders can result in units chasing each other around blocking terrain or the like, but it's not like the current set up lacks problems of its own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I'm not sure I can do your point justice mal, would you mind bringing it up in this thread on the corresponding main rules? 291523-creating-a-better-40k-initial-version-of-rules-finished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sception Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Aw, but to do that I'd have to actually read your rules, and I'm still trying to read through the actual rules of the game right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Fair enough, although we would definitely love your insight if you get the chance at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Cohort Posted July 10, 2014 Author Share Posted July 10, 2014 If you built an army list that has no melee capability and deploy so you can be assaulted though outflank that is your issue with bad tactics/ list building and not a rules problem. Assaulting through deep striking should still not be possible. (Though I may have to re-word a couple of lines to be more clear) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sception Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 considering how far from the side some outflanking units can assault? Outflanking cavalry/beasts/bikes/jetbikes? Outfanking assault or open-topped transports? And that some mission types are played long-ways? Assaulting from reserve isn't really much less trouble for the game than assaulting from deep strike. Unless you never have long-ways missions, but that's kinda hampering your design space, there. Much as an outright ban on assaulting from deep strike hampers design space. Not that I think it should be generally allowed, but removing heroic intervention from the game as a possible special rules really cuts down on a lot of conceptual space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I agree with malisteen here, and have offered some of my thoughts on the topic in the main rulebook thread. I think it came up more here than in the loyalists thread because chaos has so many assault based units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Heldrake big topic, especially since this ruleset has removed flyers Here are a set of my suggestions a. Make the head weapon a front mounted turret weapon, if the neck head looks like it could point at it, then the model can shoot at it (if within range). b. fast skimmer c. Vector strike would still work, just be worded differently d. give it the ability to fight in assaults like a walker (it is a dragon after all), at WS3, Str 7 ignores armor e. make it cost more points as the above last two points make it still frighteningly effective, also make the baleflamer upgrade cost points if it is allowed to function in an assault WS 3/ BS 3/ AV 12F/12S/10R / S 7/ I 3/ A 2 Type Skimmer, Walker? Fast It will not die, Daemon, Daemonforge, Hammer of Wrath, Deep strike something to make it able to attack probably worth about 200-220+5-15 for baleflamer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Asvaldir Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Don't think the drake really needs to fight in CC. Sure's it's a dragon but it's really just flying around and picking people up with it's claws, not landing in the middle of an enemy squad and tearing them apart. Plus a skimmer/walker wouldn't really work. I'd just leave its stats as is and make it a fast skimmer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 It is true that the drake doesn't really need to fight in close combat. Although there was once a skimmer walker in this game by the name of the dias of destruction. Silly rules combination, but it did function. It just seems odd to me that if a heldrake is charged, then it won't do anything to the unit that charged it, although I suppose it can just vector strike in the next phase as a sort of retaliation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angrypantz Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 legion warband rules..... mic drop That will happen when I have my renegades codex. you kinda already do Not really. What you want is legion specific traits like the space marine chapter ones. What I want (and didn't get) are chapter specific traits but for renegades. It shouldn't be too hard to do myself but if I play in tournaments I will have to use the chaos codex unmodified except for the suppliments (which I believe Black Legion got one as well). Some of you forget that it isn't just the legions that fell to chaos but rather a plethora of space marines across the history of the Imperium. How would you actually represent them without the appropriate chapter traits? Some might have forgotten/ rejected the training that made them who they are but not all of them. Chaos is now in a ripe position to finally split in two and have codex traitor legions and codex renegade astartes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incinerator950 Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 3.5 gave more skills for no marks, even non undivided. Granted it wasn't the best, but the ratio of slaughtertitsdiseaseevil generic name warbands/cells/hosts we have don't warrant special skill sets without equally generic skills unless copying the former idea. I love the concept of Chaos mercenaries and Rogue Astartes Pirates, but GW's authors don't. Most of the fan base already accepted you should just use the loyalist dex for non-chaos marine renegades, and a lot of people did that for their dedicated/legion warbands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 This thread has some pertinence to our conversation. In particular I think we should include, if not expand on, the custom character creator in this codex as well. http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/293696-generic-artefacts/ This thread as well http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/294324-from-the-foundations/?do=findComment&comment=3758012 Also in another thread I saw the idea for 1-3 aspiring champion for a foc options (i.e. 1-2 wound characters you can join up to units as a sort of Liutenant, a very fluffy and distinctive element of chaos.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.