The Bissler wrote:
I do think your solution was the best one and would be fun... but maybe allowing players to use whichever system they feel most comfortable with?
Oh, I dunno, I still like your solution best!
Hi!
I would agree a list of options is better. Its what we're all about after all.
Now on the matters at hand.
The original orders were made due to the turn structure devised at the time. So they tend to be pretty "fixed' in what they allow to do. I think the first step is to define what the orders mean or try to achieve under the alternate rules structure.
Advance orders should be the default order. The one most commonly used. You can move and you can shoot.
Charge orders is used either to get somewhere in a hurry OR engage in close combat. You sacrifice shooting.
These two are the easiest to define in the new turn structure. The problem is first fire. Even the orders name tells you it was made for a fixed turned sequence. So what should this order do?
Originally it gave you the ability to fire before advance fire. However with a combined activation this advantage no longer exists. I can see why you initially gave them a bonus. Perhaps first fire in this context means "carefully aiming" and thus more accurate. Problem is we use a d6 for combat resolution (a d10 would not have this problem with small bonuses).
A bonus makes first fire so attractive as to invalidate all other orders. So we must find something else.
If you give them no bonus then, advance orders is "king" and first fire "worthless". A no penalty for snap fire is okay, but advance can do that too, even if its with a -1 penalty. So, still first fire loses.
As you can see, first fire is hard to pin down because it has no precise definition in the context of the combined activation. Therefore we must first decide what the order wants to achieve.
I propose first fire be defined as something akin to "defensive fire" or "overwatch". It would do the following:
1. A unit on first fire orders may not move. If it is forcibly moved before the unit is activated it loses the first fire orders and receives advance orders.
2. A unit with first fire orders may snap fire (overwatch fire) any units within range that MOVE into their line or fire or LOS. You cannot snap fire against units that have not moved (like another unit on first fire orders). If a unit is hit with snap fire and suffers casualties (even 1 model lost), the unit must make a morale roll to continue moving. If it fails the morale roll the unit stop as the point the firing took place (as indicated by the firing player).
I postulated an additional "option" for this feature below.
3. Units on first fire orders engaged in close combat receive a bonus +1d6 for resolving close combat later in the turn sequence. This simulates the defensive "readied" fire of such units anticipating being engaged.
What does this achieve?
First the role of first fire is well defined and the player knows where and when to used it. Since combined activations mean move and shoot, then something to "Stop movement" is needed. First fire is what you do to stop people from moving to where they are going.
Second, first fire is the order you use to defend. Note first fire does not let you shoot those whom attack you in close combat. It gives you a bonus to close combat. This bonus is more advantageous than shooting since it gives units (particularly infantry) a stronger position in close combat. Even units with a CAF of zero will be dangerous if given first fire orders (they would roll 3d6!), meaning the opponent will have to think twice before committing to assault with such an order.
Units in advance are at a disadvantage in defense since they only get snap fire at -1, which means on average more units will get through and they get no close combat bonus!
Now, we can do snap fire "overwatch fire" as described above just once for each unit on first fire orders. But there is another option. Why not give units on first fire orders a "zone" of interdiction. Lets say the "overwatch zone" is 25cm regardless of the actual range of the weapons (the to hit and other stats remain the same). However in this case the unit on first fire may fire at ALL units that cross their "overwatch zone"!
As you can infer this makes first fire powerfully good for defense and interdiction, but not good for offense due to the range cap at 25mm.
It stimulates "combined arms". Right now under traditional net epic, its relatively easy to assault units in defensive positions, even if they are on first fire. With these rules it would be a bad idea. You would need other fire or artillery to inflict casualties to lower the amount of defenders before you attacked. Also powers and abilities that push units away would be very useful since you lose first fire orders if you are moved for any reason!
This means each order has a distinct tactical use. Charge for speed and assault, advance for move and shoot and first fire for defense and interdiction.
I believe this would be a good solution in the combined activation paradigm.
Thoughts?
Primarch