Tiny-Tim, I meant it would be checked every turn. Exactly due to the issues you bring up.

Ginger, sure I will. How about kindly providing me with the three leman russ formations and a bucketful of scouts to help me out with it?  

Seriously though, that's a pretty extreme army lists for the IG right there. How about an example where the smaller activation count army is something at least remotely balanced, instead of something really specific like that? You know, something not all russes.  

nealhunt, yeah, but marines are kind of lacking in artillery and any other kind of long range fire. And it's hard to reliably teleport assault anything in an army of all skimmers. Then again, I've won my last two out of three marines vs. eldar games where I was outactivated, but still.

Overwatching did help, although it was mostly a scare tactic (AT 6+ pfft) and it prevents you from moving, making it not always desireable when needing to run around picking up objectives.

I've played both ends of the spectrum with my IG

Steel Legion
Regimental HQ + Hydra
4x Infantry Company
10x Sentinels
3x Thunderbolts
Can swap around the units a little for 18-19 activations. Sometimes it lost a Thunderbolt and Hydra for Deathstrikes

I've also done all/mostly SHTs, with Minervans this is actually meaner since you can get a Stormhammer with an SC in it.

I really don't find the popcorn armies activation advantage all that advantageous most times. All those sentinels die with a stiff breeze, the Infantry companies are pretty solid though and the whole army Garrisons with 2 Companies on OW it can control much of the center of the table easy.

I actually prefer the lower activation army for its ease of use. SHT companies and Russ companies are very hard targets and very resistant to abuse. Especially since they can Marshal and still easily crush a small formation under their guns.

_________________
Fear is for the enemy, fear and bullets.
-James O'Barr, the Crow

To make things clear, I've never actually played against something like that. I agree, the sentinel masses look kind of weedy. It's mainly IG and eldar with their cheapish artillery (especially those nightspinners, 175 a pop isn't hugely expensive as formations go), some other not too expensive units mixed in (jetbikes, hydras, the ever-present deathstrikes, you know the drill) supported by a few proper formations. Not really twentyish activations, but still outactivation of at least three (probably more) accompanied by eldar move-shoot-move or artillery barraging, which you can't really retaliate to.

It's not really such a huge problem, just thought I'd pop out the idea.

Cheers Wisp,

I think that I would find the extra book keeping every turn a pain.

However, keep the ideas coming.

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion

sorry to join the discussion this late. The activation thing has bothered me too. Having an advantage thanks to activation counts feel too gamey to me.
But I think there needs to be a trade off in passing, otherwise, it may favor the player with the least activations too much.
For instance, if player A has 16 cheap formations and player B has 8 big ones, he could wait until A has moved half of his army to make a move, giving him a 2:1 advantage, as he'd be moving a force twice as powerful, assuming that the 8 formations A had to move first couldn't do much because B's units were too far away. This will never really be the case, but even in realistic situations, giving this option to B without any tradeoff would be too powerful IMO.

So if we are to do this, I think B should only be allowed to pass if:
B didn't try to retain the initiative last activation
B didn't already try to pass last activation
B has less units than A


In order to limit the use of the pass action, I have thought about using the following systems:

For 1***, 2*** and 3***, B needs to chose an unactived, unbroken formation when trying to postpone his activation:

1***
he'd roll for action with the same modifier as when trying to retain the initiative (ie, with a -1 modifier): if he fails the unit must immediately take a hold action. If the activated units gets broken, B must activate another unit during his next activation phase (he cannot try to pass with another unit).
If the acitvation check succeeds, the unit doesn't act yet, and B may pass. The units still needs to make an activation test whenever B wants to activate it later during the action phase.

2***
Same as 1*** but the selected unit must act next (ie after A activates his next formation) if B's postponing check is succesful.

3***
As 1***,  but if the check is successful, the unit may pass its turn. Otherwise, it takes a blast marker and must be activated with a further -1 penalty (but otherwise roll for action as normal).

4***
Another way to do it would be to allow the winner of the initiative rolls a number of pass actions equal to the difference in initiative scores (but remember he'd only be allowed to use these if he has less remaining formations to activate).


Of course, this still needs playtesting, and there might be better solutions, but my rationale for that was that:
-having smaller units is already a big advantage in itself, there is not need to make it even more dominant with the number of activations: I'd rather have unit choice be decided by tactical considerations than by trying to play the system
-having a pass option used to work better after it was implemented in the games I tried before
-the limitations to the pass actions are there to avoid make it a no brainer. There needs to be some risk involved (at least in options 1, 2, 3) to avoid it turning into the reverse abuse (like in Confrontation, where you'd begin by spending all your pass options). Options 4 is there to give added benefits to a hight strategic value.

I'd buy this line of thinking if overwatch let you do more than just shoot [once]. In order to properly offset an activation advantage, overwatch would have to allow you to either choose your reaction (like in WFB: stand and shoot, countercharge, or withdraw), or shoot multiple times (i.e. at each formation that moves into LoS).

So, either:

Choice A:
A formation on overwatch can choose to do one of the following when an enemy formation ends a move within range and in LoS: Shoot at +1 to-hit, perform a single move, or engage the enemy formation that triggered the overwatch. This action occurs after the enemy formation ends a move, but before it makes shooting attacks. The formation will remain on overwatch until either it performs an overwatch reaction, or until it is given another order in a subsequent turn.

Choice B:
Whenever an enemy formation ends a move within range and in LoS, the formation on overwatch may fire upon the enemy formation [with no bonus to-hit]. This may occur several times in a given turn. However, for each enemy formation that triggers the overwatch after the first, apply a -1 to-hit modifer, which is cumulative [i.e. -1 to-hit for shooting at the second triggering formation, -2 to-hit for shooting at the third triggering formation, etc.] The overwatch order ends and the end of the turn, after all withdraw moves have been performed.

An alternative to changing overwatch as I discussed above, there could be an additional order available: Delay.

Delay:
A formation given a delay order can do nothing when it is given the order, but may then be given another order later in the same turn, with a -1 activation penalty. A formation cannot be given multiple delay orders in the same turn.

That would work better than my similar suggestions indeed.

Or if we want to have a more synchronous flow (that is, if we want A and B to have moved about the same percentage of their army at the same time): B, who has the fewer units, would be allowed to pass a number of time equal to the difference between A and B units.
But he would get half of his pass action to use for the first half of the turn (ie, before A has moved half of his units), and the other half after A has moved half of his army (he would not be allowed to "save" a pass action.

I think this system would be more fair to the one with the less units, without turning having less units into too big an advantage.

4***
Another way to do it would be to allow the winner of the initiative rolls a number of pass actions equal to the difference in initiative scores (but remember he'd only be allowed to use these if he has less remaining formations to activate).

A good solution someone had proposed on F-erc was to only be allowed to pass when you had less than half of your opponent's models. Thus it would prevent early popcorn abuse by the player with the least formations, while allowing him to keep some for the end. I think it is the best option to do it.

This would make some shifts in the proportional value of different formations, probably in some unexpected ways, and would require substantial testing.  Generally speaking, it's going to favor the armies with high point-per-model costs because they'll start out with a lot fewer models.  Horde armies would have a very difficult time reaching this threshold, even when losing.  In addition, war engines could be used to trigger this because their point-per-unit/DC is really high.

For example, Warhound spam is already quite effective.  They are effectively ~85 points per DC, enough to heavily weight the force towards having fewer than half the models of the opponent, but at the same time providing a large number of activations.  For something like SMs versus Orks, SMs could end up with fewer than half the Ork models at the start of the game, but still have more activations.  Eldar could do something similar.

I'm also not too keen on having to count up every model to check.


The "Delay" action seems feasible.

===

Overall, I'm still not convinced that the advantage of an activation discrepancy is as big as it's made out to be.  I've seen too many "low activation" armies hold their own, especially IG.

_________________
Neal

ooops sorry, you are right, it would not work at all, I meant half of your opponent's formations :/
Counting model would be meaningless and too cumbersome indeed.
I should stop trying to type when I cannot find sleep.

Nothing to add to Rug's post...  

Don't take aircraft <= so it limits the tactical options available...

Don't take spacecraft <= same there

Garrison two big shooty formations on OW on your forward objectives but only use the OW in life or death situations, that way they disrupt the enemy's plans without even activating <= that is only a wait option, without a direct possibility to do so. How is it infinitely better?

Most of the other are good advice indeed, but these tips would work against the opponent wether he outactivates you or not.
So it looks like you are advocating playing better against someone outactivating you

Anyway, it is not like small formations would lose their appeal. There are many other factors that make them better than big ones:

-Less juicy target means the ennemy will not always waste a big unit firing at them.

-They can control more ground

-The ennemy still needs one unit to place a BM on each of your small units, instead of just one on a big one

-You have higher variance on activation

-you can make better use of cover, and have less LOS problem than with biger units

-small units get a much better benefit from marshall orders

The bigger units would benefit from a higher resilience, and faster strikes, which is good indeed, but in no way is it a no brainer over smaller units, even without the outactivation benefit.

I don't think this has much to do with the fact that maneuver is more important in Epic than it is in WH40K. Most of it comes from relative unit speed and range: most unit can get further with a double that they can shoot, and assault is the preferred way to fight for most armies (maybe except the guard).

That and killing can only get you so far when victory is decided by controlling objectives.

The current activation mechanism doesn't make maneuver any more important, it only makes some army compositions less viable than other.

Allowing to pass turn is maybe not critical, but it will certainly not turn the game into a SM2nd edition sluggfest.

That usually does work, yes

Actually, aircraft - cheap aircraft - is pretty useful when it comes to activation game. I love having a thunderbolt formation around with my Marines - it's cheap enough that you can just make it stand down or place a stray blast marker on a defenseless target when you don't want to commit to anything important yet.