The Bigyin
07-20-2012, 11:57 AM
Greetings all you can either read this post, and be productive, or read it and be a troll either way is fine with me. Personally I am finding the 6th edition rules a mixed bag, it seems for every rule that speeds up or addresses a problem in 5th edition (think vehicle nerf) there is another rule that slows the game down (wound allocation).
Now here is how I like to play, if you aren't like this maybe these changes aren't for you, and that's totally cool, the great thing about and rule set is you can develop it to suit your gaming groups needs. But I digress, here is what I want from a war game.
1)Tactical choice - I want to be able to make a decision, even if its the wrong one, I want to feel like I have some control in both my opponents turn and my own.
2)Simplicity - I want clear and concise rules, don't confuse this for easy rules. I want rules that do not require interpretation of debate, I don't want arguments over what model is closest etc. Even as a none competition player I think everyone on some level has a desire to win, I never want a win tarnished because my interpretation of a rule set wont out against my opponents.
3)Fluff Tastic - Might divide some peoples opinions and the validity of my points, when I talk about a games with friends I want it to be as if I am talking about a Black Library novel, comments Like 'My Ork Warboss to survive that Devastator squad when 30 of his Boyz jumped in front of him are definitely out.
Now that is out the way the disclaimer. A small group of us are testing these rules at the moment with 1000 point armies. These rules are not official, I would love for people to try them out and give me feedback, or not try them and give me feedback. These rules can be changed at any time and will be further developed over the coming days with more being added frequently (every few days I expect). Feel free to try some, all or none of the ideas I put forward if you want help me develop them.
Finally, the topic. No I dont hate Matt Ward, this is a game. I am personally disappointed with the current rule set, in my opinion as a casual gamer it the the weakest rule set seen since trying to use 2nd edition rules in anything bigger that a 1500 point game, which in all fairness was because the rule system at the time was not designed for such large armies. 6th Edition in my opinion has no excuse.
Without further rambling these are some initial ideas we are developing, if there is any confusion for rules you may want to try out please ask away.
Cover - Cover no longer offers an alternate saving throw but rather a hit modifier to reflect a unit taking cover. the modifier is as follow
Bushes/grasses/forests -1
Ruins/Buildings/reinforced positions -2
Fortifications/Aegis Line -3
It would be an idea before a game takes place to determine what modifiers each piece of terrain offers.
Rationale- When points are assigned to model they cost is reflected in its attributes. Cover saves artificially increase the point value to certain models with low armour saves, while providing no additional benefits to more point heavy/high save units. The modifier now benefits all models equally, giving a reason for high saving throw models to occupy cover while at the same time preventing using units in an none lore fashion (whoever heard of Orks hiding in bushes from advancing Space Marines!)
Assault
Reactions to assault
Overwatch - The defending unit must move models up to 1inch prior to combat starting. They must form up as close as possible in lines parallel to the unit assaulting them. There is no restriction on how long a line is formed, or how many lines are formed, however if a model moves into dangerous terrain a test is taken as normal. Models are not slowed down by difficult terrain. All models can then make a shot subject to 'snap shot rules'.
Hold Ground/Swirling Melee - The assault phase runs as normal but without overwatch shots being made. The following rules however apply. The controlling player determines which models make saving throws and which models are removed as casualties. Models removed must be within 2 inches of an opposing model.
No challenges can be made during a Hold Ground/Swirling Melee.
Sustained Fire - The unit moves as per the rules for Overwatch. Defending models must move up to 1inch prior to combat started. they must form up as close as possible in line parallel to the unit assaulting them The unit makes 2 rounds of Overwatch shooting using the snap shot rule. Once assault begins the unit is counter as having WS1 and the special rule always strikes last. The unit will pile in at its iniative value but will strike after all assaulting models have struck.
Rationale - Being assaulted now gives the defending player a decision to make, each decision has its own merits and weaknesses. These should be obvious. I will also explain the reforming rule in a little more detail. Wound allocation for assault seem very similar to the last edition of Fantasy I played (4th I believe). In principle I like the wound allocation system but find it very clunky when units occupy cover/roofed terrain etc. With these rules both attacker and defender will be placed in a more fantasy type block it makes it a lot easier to allocate wounds appropriately. Also from a 'cinematic' point of view the idea are two walls of warriors clashing into each other seem very appealing.
That's all for now, in the next few days I will be adding my own ideas for wound allocation in shooting and Independent Characters and Characters.
Thanks for reading,
Bigyin
Now here is how I like to play, if you aren't like this maybe these changes aren't for you, and that's totally cool, the great thing about and rule set is you can develop it to suit your gaming groups needs. But I digress, here is what I want from a war game.
1)Tactical choice - I want to be able to make a decision, even if its the wrong one, I want to feel like I have some control in both my opponents turn and my own.
2)Simplicity - I want clear and concise rules, don't confuse this for easy rules. I want rules that do not require interpretation of debate, I don't want arguments over what model is closest etc. Even as a none competition player I think everyone on some level has a desire to win, I never want a win tarnished because my interpretation of a rule set wont out against my opponents.
3)Fluff Tastic - Might divide some peoples opinions and the validity of my points, when I talk about a games with friends I want it to be as if I am talking about a Black Library novel, comments Like 'My Ork Warboss to survive that Devastator squad when 30 of his Boyz jumped in front of him are definitely out.
Now that is out the way the disclaimer. A small group of us are testing these rules at the moment with 1000 point armies. These rules are not official, I would love for people to try them out and give me feedback, or not try them and give me feedback. These rules can be changed at any time and will be further developed over the coming days with more being added frequently (every few days I expect). Feel free to try some, all or none of the ideas I put forward if you want help me develop them.
Finally, the topic. No I dont hate Matt Ward, this is a game. I am personally disappointed with the current rule set, in my opinion as a casual gamer it the the weakest rule set seen since trying to use 2nd edition rules in anything bigger that a 1500 point game, which in all fairness was because the rule system at the time was not designed for such large armies. 6th Edition in my opinion has no excuse.
Without further rambling these are some initial ideas we are developing, if there is any confusion for rules you may want to try out please ask away.
Cover - Cover no longer offers an alternate saving throw but rather a hit modifier to reflect a unit taking cover. the modifier is as follow
Bushes/grasses/forests -1
Ruins/Buildings/reinforced positions -2
Fortifications/Aegis Line -3
It would be an idea before a game takes place to determine what modifiers each piece of terrain offers.
Rationale- When points are assigned to model they cost is reflected in its attributes. Cover saves artificially increase the point value to certain models with low armour saves, while providing no additional benefits to more point heavy/high save units. The modifier now benefits all models equally, giving a reason for high saving throw models to occupy cover while at the same time preventing using units in an none lore fashion (whoever heard of Orks hiding in bushes from advancing Space Marines!)
Assault
Reactions to assault
Overwatch - The defending unit must move models up to 1inch prior to combat starting. They must form up as close as possible in lines parallel to the unit assaulting them. There is no restriction on how long a line is formed, or how many lines are formed, however if a model moves into dangerous terrain a test is taken as normal. Models are not slowed down by difficult terrain. All models can then make a shot subject to 'snap shot rules'.
Hold Ground/Swirling Melee - The assault phase runs as normal but without overwatch shots being made. The following rules however apply. The controlling player determines which models make saving throws and which models are removed as casualties. Models removed must be within 2 inches of an opposing model.
No challenges can be made during a Hold Ground/Swirling Melee.
Sustained Fire - The unit moves as per the rules for Overwatch. Defending models must move up to 1inch prior to combat started. they must form up as close as possible in line parallel to the unit assaulting them The unit makes 2 rounds of Overwatch shooting using the snap shot rule. Once assault begins the unit is counter as having WS1 and the special rule always strikes last. The unit will pile in at its iniative value but will strike after all assaulting models have struck.
Rationale - Being assaulted now gives the defending player a decision to make, each decision has its own merits and weaknesses. These should be obvious. I will also explain the reforming rule in a little more detail. Wound allocation for assault seem very similar to the last edition of Fantasy I played (4th I believe). In principle I like the wound allocation system but find it very clunky when units occupy cover/roofed terrain etc. With these rules both attacker and defender will be placed in a more fantasy type block it makes it a lot easier to allocate wounds appropriately. Also from a 'cinematic' point of view the idea are two walls of warriors clashing into each other seem very appealing.
That's all for now, in the next few days I will be adding my own ideas for wound allocation in shooting and Independent Characters and Characters.
Thanks for reading,
Bigyin