PDA

View Full Version : Overwatch balancing



TheDungen
06-11-2012, 19:07
First of i know were in a new edition and that the rules wont change for at least 5 years, i also want to point out i dont think the concept of overwatch is a bad one. Some unit when faced with a charge would seek to get of as many shots as possible before the combat is joined. I just dont think that everyone would do that, a specialised close combat squad wouldn't be taking pot shots with their pistols they would be preparing to meet the incoming enemies.
there are currently no downsides of choosing to overwatch however.

I think that they should make it a tougher decision in the next rulebook. my suggestion is that if the squad is busy taking pot shots it will count as having I1 for the first round of close combat. As such a guard squad charged by a mob of ork boys would still overwatch, the kills they would get in from shooting would be more usefull to them than striking first in combat. A space marine squad would maybee overwatch. a unit of vanguard or ogryns however wouldnt, they would prefer to strike before their foes instead.

So thoughts?

Drakcore Bloodtear
06-11-2012, 19:13
TBH in all my 6th edition games, overwatch has become so pointless there's almost no need for it.
The only worthwhile result from an overwatch was a plasma gun overheating and the model failing his save, meaning an easy combat for me who was charging.

Maybe if they changed it so if a unit didn't move they could overwatch with full BS, but I think that could be just another nail in the coffin that is the assault phase.

shakedown47
06-11-2012, 19:23
Personally I'd like to see a return to 2nd edition style overwatch, much like AT-43 employed. It would introduce a new strategic aspect that most of the game's current playerbase has never seen before. It works fine as is, I just would like to see it as a reaction to any movement, not just incoming charges.

Lord Inquisitor
06-11-2012, 19:40
Exactly. We need something more than a stunted stand and shoot reaction. 2nd's over watch was flawed but easily remedied. Almost every issue with the IGOUGO mechanics could be solved at a stroke with a decent overwatch system.

Every IGOUGO system has some form of overwatch, be it Epic or AT-43. The current overwatch system seems to take a page from Flames of War or Fantasy yet neuters it into a fairly insignificant reaction. With all the ways of reserves entering play, overwatch is just necessary to produce a tactical game.

Mister_Q
06-11-2012, 19:43
With an assault heavy BA army I thought overwatch would be a real pain. In practice though, it rarely seems much of a problem - I've lost a marine on a few charges, but nothing that's ever made me regret charging.

It works both ways too - I think I've been luckier with my overwatch than my regular opponent. Taking out Kharn with a snap fired Magna-grapple when he charged my Dreadnought was pretty funny. :)

The_Klobb_Maniac
06-11-2012, 20:00
overwatch is a more significant problem for "real"* armies as they are nearly guaranteed to lose a couple models. This isn't huge until it costs you a charge because your range is an inch out now. Random AND Overwatch seems to be what kills it. Losing 3 orks or something isn't a big deal. Losing three and it causes you to be out of charge range because you roll a 5, for example, IS a big deal. It's also a significant change to unit power. Before you'd strike with your extra 12 attacks with the Ork models. The marines only lose 2-3 attacks.

*I.E. All non-meq


I'm fine with it; in fact my shooty armies (all of my armies) benefit from it quite handsomely, but it doesn't mean that I don't literally feel bad when a charge is failed simply because I got a free shooting round. IMO it's powerful enough; though as I've said before, I'd rather it just be "Forfiet shooting phase to shoot at chargers in the assualt phase." Boom. Stuff can arrive and assault form anywhere without breaking the game! Why? because when they close in you are gunning them down at Full BS. No transport can stop that, no outflank can auto-screw the unit; the game is 5th ed without the free charges.

Anyway.. that's my take on it.



EDIT:
Best overwatch? Killing a defiler with Necron warriors. Yep.

Haravikk
06-11-2012, 20:19
I agree on the return of the 2nd edition style overwatch. I've been house-ruling "Delayed Fire" on top of Overwatch to try out something similar.
Basically, instead of doing anything else in your Shooting phase you can choose to Delay Fire against a single target unit in range, so long as you also didn't move that turn. In your opponent's following turn if that unit moves, Runs, shoots or charges in the unit's line of sight then it may fire with full Ballistic Skill, and with the enemy using the worst Cover Save available during the move. Obviously it can only do this once in the turn (not once for each action), and it is also balanced a bit by suffering a -1 Ballistic Skill penalty if the enemy is moving out of, or moving into, cover, since it's a more difficult shot to get them in the open. However, choosing to Delay Fire means you can't Overwatch, which means it's useless if the enemy can charge you with something else, and if they don't trigger your delayed fire then you've completely wasted your unit's shooting unless it kept the enemy from doing anything useful (baiting you into delaying fire could be considered useful depending how you handle it ;)).
I've also been recently trying adding a leadership test if a unit that is delaying fire is shot at by something other than their target unit, to represent covering fire.

Starchild
06-11-2012, 22:15
So Dungen, you would unfairly penalize units such as Guardians and Termagants, who have such a short range on their weapons that overwatch is often the only chance they get to shoot? :eyebrows:

Nurgling Chieftain
06-11-2012, 22:46
I think units should be able to simply delay their shooting from their own shooting phase until the end of the opponent's shooting phase (beginning if they have interceptor).

damiengore
06-11-2012, 23:18
Overmatch the way it is is awesome! Sure you don't kill anything half the time but the orher half you kill some stuff and you get to roll a lot of dice! Fun!
And let me say this 30 shotta boys or 20 csm's or 50 guardsmen can stop a charge dead with over watch, seen it happen numerous times.
Also it does add an element of tactics forcing you to decide whether or not to over watch depending on how many units could charge you.
Example: I downed a lord of change who had breath of chaos, I wanted to charge in with my fooled chaos lord but it was a good 7". I assumed he would kill at least 1 forcing it out to 9". My guard blob was 10" away so I started with them, he elected not to overwater and I rolled a 10! Boing! Took 5 rounds of combat but my lord tooled ithe beast!
Finally 2nd edition is junk, pure garbage, nothing good comes from that frothing bag of poo. And yes I did play it way back and it killed my will to war game so much I didn't play again till half way through 4th!
If you want a more engaging overwatch system play infinity.

TheDungen
06-11-2012, 23:26
I'm just throwing the ball around starchild. You do with it what you will. Same as my sugestions about warlord traits. It's more brainstorming than real ideas. But the more good ideas the community generates the liklier it is that the devs will pick something up. And good ideas come from good discussions.

Venkh
06-11-2012, 23:42
Should you be able to over watch while pinned? This just seems to make sense to me

That said, pinned units are rarer than hens teeth so I'm not sure what difference it would make

Daedalus81
07-11-2012, 00:21
Overwatch makes flamers much more tantalizing.

Chem-Dog
07-11-2012, 00:22
A space marine squad would maybee overwatch. a unit of vanguard or ogryns however wouldnt, they would prefer to strike before their foes instead.

At initiative 2, I see no reason why the Ogryn wouldn't just let rip(per), most of the time we're striking last anyway.


I have no problem with Overwatch the way it is now, I've had infantry squads slay squads of Wyches with it (gotta love Wall of death) and I've had Ogryn fail to hit with a single thing despite there being eight of them with three shots each :cries: so it is hugely variable and for it to be an option that one has to weigh up, I'd want a bit more certainty than 6's to hit.

My problem with the rule is the way it's explained. Surely being charged by the enemy is the ONE time in battle that you really make your shots count, not get all jellified because someone's running towards you. Obviously there's no way to do that in the game without utterly breaking the way 40K plays, but a little bit more thought into why the elite of the elite of the elite suddenly can't shoot for toffee would have reduced the number of WTF moments I had when reading through the book for the first time.



If we're building the thing from the ground up I'd give units three choices. Fire, Meet the attack and run away (this used to be the way with WHFB I believe, but dunno these days) Shooting lets you shoot wth some kind of limitation (not snapfire though) meeting the attack would be something akin to counterattack and running away is pretty self explanatory. ban certain units from certain options (like no running away if you're fearless) and presto.

But like I said, as it stands it's better than just waiting there.

RugbySkin
07-11-2012, 02:44
To everyone sayign Overwatch isn't a big deal, assault a Sisters squad sometime.

There was barely enough left of my Archon to stuff into the regeneration tanks...

Bubble Ghost
07-11-2012, 09:04
The whole point of Overwatch is to balance the variable charge distance, the point of which in turn is to add an element of decision making to charging, as opposed to having your attacks bonus doled out entirely by the turn sequence rather than player input. It's not there to be a serious representation of defensive fire; it's just a little slap on the wrist to discourage you from mindlessly declaring charges every time you're in range because there's no down side to doing so.

Overwatch doesn't need a drawback because it IS the drawback.




My problem with the rule is the way it's explained. Surely being charged by the enemy is the ONE time in battle that you really make your shots count, not get all jellified because someone's running towards you.

That view is based on the assumption that a Space Marine always has a 66% chance of hitting something every time he pulls the trigger, and that therefore his aim is somehow spoiled by being charged. But that's not what's happening. An overwatch shot just represents circumstances in which the training that gives a unit a high BS in the first place is less relevant.

BS representing nothing but marksmanship is extremely simplistic - it's actually far more to do with awareness, discipline and experience when the unit is shooting on its own terms (i.e. the kind of shooting you engage in in your own turn). An ork, for example, isn't BS2 because he's naturally a bad shot - he just can't be bothered to aim. The idea is not that he's doing what a Space Marine does only less well somehow; it's that he's not doing any of the things that a Space Marine squad does that gives it a high BS in the first place. In the circumstances an overwatch shot takes place in, a Space Marine squad can make less use of this drilling and experience, and so the differences between them and orks in this particular context are lessened.

Sure, there'd still be some difference between troops shooting on overwatch - you could make a logic/realism based case for overwatch being a BS penalty rather than a flat roll, or for high Initiative troops getting a reroll, or whatever. And I'm mildly suprised there's no overwatch-related USR. But I really don't think it's a big deal at the level of detail 40K works on, and in order to serve the rule's purpose, I think it's fine.

Malagor
07-11-2012, 10:43
To everyone sayign Overwatch isn't a big deal, assault a Sisters squad sometime.

Or you could just not charge into enemies with flamerthrowers.
So no, overwatch isn't a big deal overall.
Personally I like it.
As stated it doesn't make that big of a deal but it can provide some fun moments and that is always good for a game.

sprugly
07-11-2012, 11:00
What about if you could instead of firing in your own turn you could "set up overwatch" then in your opponents turn you could overwatch at full bs?

Sounds balanced enough?

Sprugly

Sureshot05
07-11-2012, 13:44
Personally, I'd go for an overwatch phase inserted at the end of the movement phase for any units placed on overwatch last turn. Units have to sacrifice shooting to use this in the next turn. It would solve the flyers issue and allow units to react to CC just as neatly. I'd even consider letting units that didn't use overwatch still get the bs1 shots and avoid the worst bits of 2nd Ed. In return I'd give all charging units an extra D6 combat resolution or maybe +2 attacks per model for charging to balance the extra shooting damage.

Banville
07-11-2012, 13:57
This is another vote for the old 2ed Overwatch. It needed a tune up/down though. For those too young to know what us grizzled types are talking about, here's a brief outline (as far as I can remember)

After movement you could forfeit all other actions to go on overwatch. Overwatch allowed you to shoot out of sequence at a single unit that entered your line of sight and weapon range. This meant you could put units on Overwatch to prevent enemies moving out of cover or onto an objective or across a certain patch of ground. I think the shots were taken at -1 your ballistic skill. Other modifiers stacked with this, though so a fast-moving target would be a further -1, a unit moving out of or into cover would confer another -1, a large target would be +1 etc etc.

of course this would necessitate the reinstatement of arcs of fire and BS modifiers. God forbid that the developers of 40k might realise that a cohort of gamers who can assimilate dozens of abstract rules are actually capable of chimpanzee-level maths and that said maths might actually add complexity and depth to the game.

Wolf Lord Balrog
07-11-2012, 14:15
If anything Overwatch needs to be strengthened. I think units that didn't fire in their previous Shooting phase should be allowed to Overwatch at full BS.

Konovalev
07-11-2012, 15:28
I think something that is being overlooked here is how close combat works. When 2 units engage in close combat they are well and truly stuck in. 2 men enter, 1 man leaves. And so because of this units that can assault out of deepstrike, or otherwise easily get into assault with little chance of failure are rare. I think overwatch should be left as it is, but an option for fleeing when charged to be added. Make fleeing cause the unit to break and therefore be forced to regroup. This way your unit can avoid being slaughtered in that charge, but unless you have other units on hand to support your now broken unit you have only delayed the inevitable. Finally add the caveat that any unit with fearless or ATSKNF cannot elect to flee.

cynic
07-11-2012, 19:04
in general i think overwatch is ok as it is.

my best overwatch moment so far was when my opponent charged my war walker squadron (with full scatterlasers)... i did pre-warn him that it was a bad idea...

Latro_
07-11-2012, 19:24
Did this vid a when 6th came out i think i had to much sugar that day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kmz7uXeWz_c

Been playing lots of games ever since, and as expected from the vid, it does very little on average. Its like deny the witch, last night i made two of them vs memphison doing nasty stuff at my plague marines, very lucky. Some times overwatch will be silly good.. most of the time its meh.

The exception to the rule are flamers of tzeentch though, they do well (probably 'to' well) from overwatch.

Id'd just get rid of it entirly or replace it with a single roll if you have guns, on a 6 the enemy is suppressed coming in and is at -1I... simple like deny the witch, quick and easy. Maybe for every 5 guys you get +1 to the roll or something.

Lord Inquisitor
08-11-2012, 00:06
The thing is, it could be useful for many areas the game is lacking. It's unrealistic and unsatisfying that aircraft can fly in and take out AA units before the AA units can fire despite the vastly superior range. Likewise, alpha-strike units such as outflankers, deep strikers or whatever come on and toast a unit - it's dumb that you can't set units to protect your flanks, if you set up a fire team to cover your flanks they should be able to shoot outflankers as they appear!

We didn't need a stand and shoot reaction in 40K. While it exists in WFB and Flames of War, 40K was fine without it until now and making it hit only on 6s means in most cases it's not really worth the effort of actually rolling the dice and just slows the game down, with certain super-effective exceptions that are just horrific to charge. What we needed was some form of response system to deal with reserve units or units in transports suddenly appearing and laying down an unrealistic amount of fire before being fired upon! A unit disembarking from a transport or deepstriking or emerging from a drop pod surely is at a momentary disadvantage? Even if its for a split second for elite troops like marines, just the logistics of all piling out of a transport or flier means there's going to be a moment where they are vulnerable to the enemy fire if the enemy is prepared for it.

We need a real overwatch system. What we got is ... pointless extra dice rolling. It adds little to the tactics of the game whereas real overwatch would add so much.

Chem-Dog
08-11-2012, 04:52
To everyone sayign Overwatch isn't a big deal, assault a Sisters squad sometime.

There was barely enough left of my Archon to stuff into the regeneration tanks...

Why didn't the Archon send in a distraction unit first? 2/10 for evil genius-ing.



That view is based on the assumption that a Space Marine always has a 66% chance of hitting something every time he pulls the trigger

Not at all, it's based on the very simple observation that, of all the directions a target can be running- right towards you- is the one that gives you the best chance of hitting them, the target just keeps getting bigger.
Snapping off shots as you hurriedly prepare your own melee weapons to meet the charge? Fine (athough that means melee armed troops look a bit stupid).
Even suggesting that charging enemies zigzag, kicking up dust or forcing you to keep your head down with grenades and guns as they charge would have been better, but we got "there's something distinctly off-putting about the onset of a bellowing foe".
Not a fatal disconnect, but given the number of different units in the game that are either eagerly anticipating getting to grips with the enemy, trained specifically to be unflappable, entirely unconcerned by their own well-being or not entirely aware anyway, it is a disconnect all the same.

I like abstraction, but only when it enforces the narrative.

druchii
08-11-2012, 04:59
We need a real overwatch system. What we got is ... pointless extra dice rolling. It adds little to the tactics of the game whereas real overwatch would add so much.

No we don't. We've seen what happens in games where that exists (like 2nd edition and to a lesser extent, infinity) and those games are boring and dull.

I'm curious as to exactly why you think we NEED a system like this in 40k. It isn't like shooting is exactly weak or hurting.

d

Nym
08-11-2012, 09:41
Many people here seem to forget how beneficial Overwatch is to some units. Pretty much any Necron armed with a Tesla weapon for example.

10 Tesla Immortals on Overwatch will deal roughly 5 hits, and 10 Tomb Blades 9 hits (!!). I play Orks, and when I face a Necron army full of Tesla weaponery, I *really* have the impression that 6th edition killed Assault. Removing casualties from the front is only adding insult to the injury.

As some pointed out, Overwatch should have been at full BS, but only if you didn't fire in the previous turn, in order to give Shuriken cats and other low range weapons a chance to fire at least once. As it is right now, it's purely a gift to shooty armies and they really didn't need it to begin with.

Solonor
08-11-2012, 09:47
The thing is, it could be useful for many areas the game is lacking. It's unrealistic and unsatisfying that aircraft can fly in and take out AA units before the AA units can fire despite the vastly superior range. Likewise, alpha-strike units such as outflankers, deep strikers or whatever come on and toast a unit - it's dumb that you can't set units to protect your flanks, if you set up a fire team to cover your flanks they should be able to shoot outflankers as they appear!

I see your points and i agree to some extent, especially regarding flyers, but don't forget that your paying (or should be paying) for the ability to deep-strike, outflank etc., and your missing one turn of the action (not counting drop pods) to get that alpha strike, besides alpha-strikes are supposed to be surprise attacks on the unsuspecting enemy, if i pay for the ability and loose at least one turn of fighting and when i finally appear i still manage to get shot before i do anything, well that isn't fair either.


We didn't need a stand and shoot reaction in 40K. While it exists in WFB and Flames of War, 40K was fine without it until now and making it hit only on 6s means in most cases it's not really worth the effort of actually rolling the dice and just slows the game down, with certain super-effective exceptions that are just horrific to charge. What we needed was some form of response system to deal with reserve units or units in transports suddenly appearing and laying down an unrealistic amount of fire before being fired upon! A unit disembarking from a transport or deepstriking or emerging from a drop pod surely is at a momentary disadvantage? Even if its for a split second for elite troops like marines, just the logistics of all piling out of a transport or flier means there's going to be a moment where they are vulnerable to the enemy fire if the enemy is prepared for it.

We need a real overwatch system. What we got is ... pointless extra dice rolling. It adds little to the tactics of the game whereas real overwatch would add so much.

I think overwatch in its form it's not perfect but it does add some tactical opportunities to the game, because it makes mutliple shot/flamer equipped infantry a good enough counter or menace to many assault units, so they can be used to screen other more vunerable units to the threat of being charged.

Haravikk
08-11-2012, 11:58
As some pointed out, Overwatch should have been at full BS, but only if you didn't fire in the previous turn, in order to give Shuriken cats and other low range weapons a chance to fire at least once. As it is right now, it's purely a gift to shooty armies and they really didn't need it to begin with.
The problem is that the simple system of don't shoot in order to Overwatch at full BS can ending being even better for shooting armies; for example - if you Overwatch against an enemy that was in cover then you effectively ignore their cover save or force them not to charge at all. It still needs to be balanced with at least a -1 Ballistic Skill penalty, with no blast weapons and template weapons using the current wall of fire rule; maybe even forcing one shot per model to reduce Rapid Fire's effectiveness, as charging Imperial Guard right now can be surprisingly murderous, and that's with Snap Shots only.

The trade off for Overwatch could be made a little bit more interesting as well by letting you trade normal shooting for either BS -1 shooting at a charging enemy, or Snap Shooting with the Interceptor rule. Useful for helping you to cover your flanks with some limited firepower.

RandomThoughts
08-11-2012, 12:13
Personally I'd like to see a return to 2nd edition style overwatch, much like AT-43 employed. It would introduce a new strategic aspect that most of the game's current playerbase has never seen before. It works fine as is, I just would like to see it as a reaction to any movement, not just incoming charges.

Peronally I'd favor a simple swap of shooting phaces between players.

Player A moves, Player B reacts (shoots), Player A assaults.
And then Player B moves, Player A reacts (shoots), Player B assaults.

Bubble Ghost
08-11-2012, 12:17
Snapping off shots as you hurriedly prepare your own melee weapons to meet the charge? Fine (athough that means melee armed troops look a bit stupid).
Even suggesting that charging enemies zigzag, kicking up dust or forcing you to keep your head down with grenades and guns as they charge would have been better, but we got "there's something distinctly off-putting about the onset of a bellowing foe".
Not a fatal disconnect, but given the number of different units in the game that are either eagerly anticipating getting to grips with the enemy, trained specifically to be unflappable, entirely unconcerned by their own well-being or not entirely aware anyway, it is a disconnect all the same.

I like abstraction, but only when it enforces the narrative.

It's really that one sentence of half-hearted rationalising filler that bothers you? You can't pay any attention to that stuff, man, the stupid bits of fluff they put in the rules are only there to grease them up for first time readers. They're not supposed to be some rigid declaration of exactly what is happening.





We need a real overwatch system. What we got is ... pointless extra dice rolling. It adds little to the tactics of the game whereas real overwatch would add so much.

I agree to an extent with what you think the game is lacking (although I don't agree that an overwatch system is a necessary component of an IGO-UGO game); but comparing 2nd ed overwatch to current overwatch is pointless. The new system isn't even trying to be what the old one was, the fact that it shares the name is just fan service for old timers...

I actually think that the stand-and-shoot type thing combined with the variable charge distance is one of the best and most important changes they made, in terms of their own OK-you-can-stop-going-on-about-it-now mission of "forging a narrative". This is because in 40K, units have always had a big bonus for being the side that makes the final move into combat, i.e. "charging", but in 3rd-5th ed, there was no sense that this bonus had to be earned through player input - you just got it if your troops were faster and it happened to be your turn. It felt like a big invisible pendulum was swinging back and forth doling out favours to the side it landed on, independently of the flow of time and sequence of events that the game was trying to make seem real. The fact that you were not simulating a battle, but playing a game with 'turns', was rammed down your throat instead of disguised, the impression being created that the inactive player's army would screech to a halt and then stand around waiting patiently, politely allowing the other side to shoot and charge them.

But now, the player has to make a decision with a corresponding risk in order to get a charge off - and suddenly that charge bonus is now the logical consequence of a bold move by an in-universe character, and earned by a player's decision rather dispensed from a slot. The message it sends regarding the reality of what's going on is an almost immeasurable improvement over previous editions, and makes the game seem much more involving and believable. The fact that this change in tone is achieved without much practical difference in how the game is played speaks volumes about what a significant part of the 'fluff' the rules can be.

Just that braindead out-of-sequence fall back move spoiling the party on that score now, then...

Mister_Q
09-11-2012, 10:37
It's unrealistic and unsatisfying that aircraft can fly in and take out AA units before the AA units can fire despite the vastly superior range.
Don't most AA things have the Interceptor rule? That let's them fire at arriving aircraft before the craft gets to shoot.

In any case, I still find overwatch fine. There's a bunch of dice rolls and maybe an enemy model or two gets killed. If that prevents the assault from working then your opponent either needed to be closer or just got really unlucky.

Maskedman5oh4
09-11-2012, 13:40
Genestealers cry then they assault noise marines with sonic weaponry.

Sonic blasters with 3 shots, ignoring cover and I get no assault grenades, no save and remove my casualties from the front.