Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=24130		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  semajnollissor [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
I was thinking that allowing for charge reactions would be beneficial to the game.

Consider a formation being allowed to make a token move (5cm/10cm) in any direction when engaged, but before the charging formation makes its move. This could be in lieu of the counter charge move that is currently in the rules.

I believe tau can do something like this already, but why not have a more universal rule? Perhaps limit the ability to formations on overwatch?
Author:  carlos [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
Quote:
I was thinking that allowing for charge reactions would be beneficial to the game.

You need to explain it a bit better than this.
Author:  Irisado [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
Is there a problem with the rules as they currently are that warrants this change?
Author:  Steve54 [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
Tau jetpacks used to do this but it was very unpopular, all it leads to is stalled assaults+makes CC troops even worse
Author:  semajnollissor [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
This really is just a random thought I had and thought I'd share.

So, for instance, overwatch is useless for a large number of possible formations in the game, because of lack of ranged shooting that the units in the formation may have. If overwatch gave the unit the ability to react to a charge by moving towards or away from the enemy, then maybe overwatch would be a viable option for those types of formations.

Or, if the ability were generally available, it would have a large impact on how the game is played. If you knew that a target formation could back up 5cm or 10cm before you moved to engage it, you would have to set up your assault in a different way than is done now. Clipping assaults are affected, since the target formation could reposition to bring more units into play, or move to take the formation out of engage range all together.

No pressing need for this rule, just the thinking that it would add a wrinkle to the game that might help in certain game-y situations.
Author:  semajnollissor [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
Steve54 wrote:
Tau jetpacks used to do this but it was very unpopular, all it leads to is stalled assaults+makes CC troops even worse

Did the tau special rule allow for a full move, or some limited move like we have for counter-charging (5cm)?

Also, I'm certain this would have a huge effect on the game, I was just wondering if people think it would make the game better if something like this had been included from the start.
Author:  carlos [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
the other way around, if the move is done before the engage move, then it's even easier to clip since it's a sitting target
Author:  Irisado [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
semajnollissor wrote:
No pressing need for this rule, just the thinking that it would add a wrinkle to the game that might help in certain game-y situations.


It just adds another layer of rules, and there are already enough rules to remember during assaults, so I would definitely be against it, as it disrupts the flow of the game.
Author:  semajnollissor [ Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
Not if they don't have guns to shoot. Also, it could be one or the other (shoot or move) instead of both.
Author:  Ginger [ Thu Oct 18, 2012 7:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
I don't this is really necessary, and expect the additional complication will far outweigh the benifit.

Real world, when you set up in OW,
  • You have prepared a killing zone and are ready to blast the bunch that step into the trap . . .
  • OR, you are a lightly armed scout troop that intend to bug out at the first opportunity. . .
  • Rarely, you are a lightly armed troop that has blundered into something a lot bigger than you, so blast them before they get you . . .

What I think you are aluding to is actually giving people the chance to evade something nasty coming their way, which would remove clipping to a large extent by giving the target the opportunity to regroup to face the threat. In practice clipping represents the element of surprise, where an over-extended formation is caught out and the attempt to re-group causes the entire formation to run away.

However, in the spirit of discussing/spit-balling the topic, two thoughts for house-rule modifications:-
  • Scouts on OW might be given the chance to react differently to a threat, perhaps by taking an activation test to perform a single withdrawal move rather than fire?
  • Others on OW might be given the chance to keep on firing until over-run - so treat their shooting as a Sustain, but remove their FF capability. This option is not available to formations other than the target.
Author:  MikeT [ Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Charge reactions - rule amendment idea to discuss
The initial Imperial Armor Tau list did indeed have something like this, where crisis suits were allowed to countercharge 10cm away from the enemy. It sounded like a nice representation of the 40k Tau jet packs but in practice was incredibly frustrating to play against.


Extending your thought experiment though for a moment, it would potentially. E interesting to allow an over watching formation to single move rather than shoot maybe, to allow them to reposition sass to not. E clipped, or to run away. Tis would obviously constitute their activation for that turn so would probably be a fair trade for the opposition player who assaulted.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/